# More record temps



## Chris (Mar 21, 2011)

Record Events for Mon Mar 14, 2011 through Sun Mar 20, 2011 

High Temperatures: 537 
Low Temperatures: 11 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## Chris (Mar 22, 2011)

Record Events for Tue Mar 15, 2011 through Mon Mar 21, 2011 

High Temperatures: 681 
Low Temperatures: 10 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## Chris (Mar 23, 2011)

Record Events for Wed Mar 16, 2011 through Tue Mar 22, 2011 

High Temperatures: 756 
Low Temperatures: 14 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## Chris (Mar 24, 2011)

Record Events for Thu Mar 17, 2011 through Wed Mar 23, 2011 

High Temperatures: 870 
Low Temperatures: 23 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## Chris (Mar 25, 2011)

Record Events for Fri Mar 18, 2011 through Thu Mar 24, 2011 

High Temperatures: 808 
Low Temperatures: 21 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## RetiredGySgt (Mar 25, 2011)

You did not care when the cold was record. As I recall your mantra was The US is not the world. But now you are claiming just the opposite, Go figure.


----------



## skookerasbil (Mar 25, 2011)

Chris said:


> Record Events for Mon Mar 14, 2011 through Sun Mar 20, 2011
> 
> High Temperatures: 537
> Low Temperatures: 11
> ...




But guess what s0n??????????


*NOBODY CARES!!!!!*

*Only 33% Think Most Americans Blame Humans for Global Warming*

Thursday, March 24, 2011

President Obama, former Vice President Al Gore and the United Nations, among others, argue that global warming is chiefly caused by human activity. A plurality of voters recognize that this view is held mostly by liberals rather than by all Americans. 

In fact, a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 33% of Likely U.S. Voters mistakenly think most Americans agree that global warming is caused primarily by human activity. Forty-six percent (46%) recognize that the view is held primarily by liberals (To see survey question wording, click here.). 

Only 33% Think Most Americans Blame Humans for Global Warming - Rasmussen Reports






Know what that  means asshole?

Your side lost the debate!!!!

Of course, kicking numbers around for shits and giggles can be a bit of fun I guess!!!!


----------



## Trakar (Mar 25, 2011)

RetiredGySgt said:


> You did not care when the cold was record. As I recall your mantra was The US is not the world. But now you are claiming just the opposite, Go figure.



You are quite right, voluntary surveys of seasonal daily weather extremes, such as this, are without great significance. Compilations of such record extremes over multi-decadal periods and over regional and global ranges, however, are the data from which long-term weather trends (aka Climate) are determined.


----------



## Trakar (Mar 25, 2011)

skookerasbil said:


> ...Only 33% Think Most Americans Blame Humans for Global Warming - Rasmussen Reports...




Global warming or climate change?: Whether the planet is warming depends on question wording - âGlobal warmingâ or âclimate changeâ?



> In public discourse and survey research, global climate change is sometimes referred to as global warming and sometimes as climate change. An analysis of web sites of conservative and liberal think tanks suggests that conservatives prefer to use the term global warming whereas liberals prefer climate change. A question wording experiment (N = 2267) illustrates the power of these frames: Republicans were less likely to endorse that the phenomenon is real when it was referred to as global warming (44.0%) rather than climate change (60.2%), whereas Democrats were unaffected by question wording (86.9% vs. 86.4%). As a result, the partisan divide on the issue dropped from 42.9 percentage points under a global warming frame to 26.2 percentage points under a climate change frame. Theoretical and methodological implications are discussed.



Given Rasmussen's record of bias, the nature of population sampled, and the wording of the question,...it all seems pretty much without any clear indication of much of anything.
Regardless, your promotion of political aspects and focus upon uninformed opinions to decide issues of science and fact pretty much self-highlights your confusions and their sourcing.


----------



## skookerasbil (Mar 25, 2011)

Trakar said:


> skookerasbil said:
> 
> 
> > ...Only 33% Think Most Americans Blame Humans for Global Warming - Rasmussen Reports&#8482;...
> ...




Who gives a rats ass about the science. Apparently, the voters do not. Only a complete dummy would dismiss the Rasmussen poll.  The FACT is, Cap and Trade legislation is in the morgue for at least another 9 years or so...........which completely supports the results of the Rasmussen poll. Of course, those with the political IQ of a small soap dish wont get it...........


oh.......and ps.........in terms of Rasmussen polling, nobody nailed the 2008 election closer. In fact, a month out of the election, Rasmussen was spot on and .............laugh  my ass off............every liberal k00k like Trakar was falling all over themselves to post up the Rasmussen poll. Two years later, suddenly Rasmussen is a fraud


----------



## Old Rocks (Mar 27, 2011)

*Dang, where did our cold winter go to?*

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View

Record Events for Sun Mar 20, 2011 through Sat Mar 26, 2011 
Total Records: 2440 
Rainfall: 757 
Snowfall: 320 
High Temperatures: 577 
Low Temperatures: 43 
Lowest Max Temperatures: 199 
Highest Min Temperatures: 544


----------



## RetiredGySgt (Mar 27, 2011)

Old Rocks said:


> *Dang, where did our cold winter go to?*
> 
> HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View
> 
> ...



Once again you and Chris are disingenuous, both of you had nothing but disdain for any record cold set in the US all winter but now suddenly temps in the US matter?  Sure thing.


----------



## percysunshine (Mar 27, 2011)

Record Events for Sun Mar 27;

Chris contemplates his virginity.


----------



## Zoom-boing (Mar 27, 2011)

It's been winter coat and gloves cold this past week.


----------



## Chris (Mar 28, 2011)

Record Events for Mon Mar 21, 2011 through Sun Mar 27, 2011 

High Temperatures: 538 
Low Temperatures: 48 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## eots (Mar 28, 2011)




----------



## Chris (Mar 28, 2011)

Record Events for Mon Mar 21, 2011 through Sun Mar 27, 2011 

High Temperatures: 538 
Low Temperatures: 48 

http://mapcenter.hamweather.com/records/7day/us.html?c=maxtemp


----------



## eots (Mar 28, 2011)




----------



## skookerasbil (Mar 28, 2011)

Ummmm.........just a public service announcement for this guy Chris................










s0n.........listen up. Effexor XR is an SSRO in terms of drug class............highly effective for disrupting rhumiination of thoughts. Many people dont even realize they have OCD going on but it is usually fairly well defined in terms of behavior if you're paying attention. This obsession with temperatures bro........its a problem and Im being serious. Its no different than the guy who cant leave his house without washing his hands 8 times....................same dynamic, just manifests itself in different ways.
Dollar to a stale donut there is a genetic link.............just take a look at family members who are dealing with depression s0n..........OCD falls under the umbrella. Rocks has the same deal going on by the way........when a specific item/concept dominates your life, the seretonin dynamic is the culprit.............100% certainty.

At least do a little research and free yourself up................riding a roller coaster is cool, but it sucks when you cant get off the damn thing.


----------



## Chris (Mar 29, 2011)

Record Events for Tue Mar 22, 2011 through Mon Mar 28, 2011 

High Temperatures: 473 
Low Temperatures: 92 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## Old Rocks (Apr 3, 2011)

*Whee, cold temps exceed warm temps. Let's throw a party. See, we did post it!*

Record Events for Sun Mar 27, 2011 through Sat Apr 2, 2011 
Total Records: 1335 
Rainfall: 290 
Snowfall: 148 
High Temperatures: 130 
Low Temperatures: 137 
Lowest Max Temperatures: 525 
Highest Min Temperatures: 105


----------



## Harry Dresden (Apr 3, 2011)

Old Rocks said:


> *Whee, cold temps exceed warm temps. Let's throw a party. See, we did post it!*
> 
> Record Events for Sun Mar 27, 2011 through Sat Apr 2, 2011
> Total Records: 1335
> ...



i used to have some respect for you Rocks.....but if your going to play "the Chrissy Game"......then it has just dropped to the respect i have for that repetitious dipshit.....


----------



## Old Rocks (Apr 3, 2011)

Harry Dresden said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> > *Whee, cold temps exceed warm temps. Let's throw a party. See, we did post it!*
> ...



Hey, it drives some people here ape. Well worth the effort


----------



## Harry Dresden (Apr 4, 2011)

Old Rocks said:


> Harry Dresden said:
> 
> 
> > Old Rocks said:
> ...



Rocks....you at least will discuss the point.....Chris will just post the same shit over and over....and never replies to questions .....hence the reason so many here have no respect for the guy....dont put yourself in that category....whether your right or wrong you at least show a number on the IQ Index.....


----------



## Old Rocks (Apr 4, 2011)

The weekly posting of high and low, for 2% of the world's area, in and of itself, means little. Within natural variation and differances between land masses, means almost nothing. What is interesting is that we have a very strong La Nina, yet the UAH figure for January and February are only -0.01 and -0.02. It should be far lower than that.


----------



## skookerasbil (Apr 5, 2011)

Harry Dresden said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> > Harry Dresden said:
> ...




Dresden bro........its not an IQ thing. This asshole Chris is pretty smart but......its a thought processing thing. IQ and mental disorders are vastly different. There are lots and lots of smart people who also have a constant misfire with the setting screws ( thats what psychiatrists I work with say!!!). Actually very correctable with pharmachological aids which can often produce miracles.............thus, my suggestion for Chris to do some Effexor XR research above..........he definately has an issue with perseverating thoughts ( OCD). There are others on here with similar issues.........like Ravi/Shaman and Rightwinger. Holy Mother of God......theres somebodies who SCREAM "I need an SSRO drug.". Rocks does appear to have a tunnel mentality for this temperature stuff but I dont see an OCD issue needing meds..........his shit is rooted in hate for the establishment and hate for successful people. Of course, when you're working for decades in the middle of the forest and a wood mill, that shit happens I guess.

Some people need SSRO meds to change the seretonin dynamic............easily identified by looking at post count #'s on this forum.


----------



## Chris (Apr 8, 2011)

Record Events for Fri Apr 1, 2011 through Thu Apr 7, 2011 

High Temperatures: 350 
Low Temperatures: 76 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## Chris (Apr 10, 2011)

Record Events for Sun Apr 3, 2011 through Sat Apr 9, 2011 

High Temperatures: 791 
Low Temperatures: 160 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## Chris (Apr 13, 2011)

Record Events for Wed Apr 6, 2011 through Tue Apr 12, 2011 

High Temperatures: 1182 

Low Temperatures: 196


http://mapcenter.hamweather.com/records/7day/us.html?c=maxtemp


----------



## Chris (Apr 17, 2011)

Record Events for Sun Apr 10, 2011 through Sat Apr 16, 2011 

High Temperatures: 910 
Low Temperatures: 98 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## skookerasbil (Apr 17, 2011)

On OCD..........


Obsessive

obsessive-compulsive disorder - Bing Health

Obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) - MayoClinic.com



On effectiveness of pharmacological aids............

*While both drugs are very effective, SSRIs have generally become the preferred medication for anxiety disorders, including OCD. SSRIs have less side effects than other forms of antidepressants, less withdrawal symptoms, less danger in the event of an overdose and overall are considered safer that other types of drugs (TCAs and SSRIs are both very safe drugs, however). Common SSRIs include fluoxetine (Prozac), fluvoxamine (Luvox), sertraline (Zoloft), paroxetine (Paxil), citalopram (Celexa), and escitalopram (Lexapro).*


Medications for OCD




s0n........being obsessed with the world coming to an end due to global warming is the exact same thing as the guy who cant go to the beach due to being obsessed with a 500 foot tsunami coming ashore. Treatments the same bro.......lines up the setting screws in the nogin the way they should be.

Time to hit the reset button. You can thank me later.............


Treatment for Rocks would be different.........he just needs to go rob some rich guy of a couple of million $$ or go on that trading places show and send some millionaire packing to go work in the shit-hole he works in!!!


----------



## Chris (Apr 17, 2011)

Record Events for Sun Apr 10, 2011 through Sat Apr 16, 2011 

High Temperatures: 911 
Low Temperatures: 113 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## chikenwing (Apr 17, 2011)

Havn't spent much time in the north east this winter?? Seems its still here,the last of the snow just melted a few days ago.


----------



## westwall (Apr 17, 2011)

Big whoop!


----------



## skookerasbil (Apr 17, 2011)

westwall said:


> Big whoop!




West..........where did you find that bro???

Classic.........


Gore came out of his hibernation today.......to the reality of the political quicksand!!! This time.,.....he went out and compared the fight over global warming to be more important than the civil rights movement!!!


You know........I remember him walking throough the Capitol for the Bush inauguration in 2001.........you looked at him and you knew the guy had snapped.


----------



## westwall (Apr 17, 2011)

skookerasbil said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > Big whoop!
> ...







I just did an image search for no one cares and that was the best picture I found.  My fondest memory of Gore is when h visited monticello and he was asking who the busts were.....he needs to look at the cash in his pocket...what a fool.


----------



## polarbear (Apr 24, 2011)

Hey guys I promise You if you click on this link it won`t send You to the "cussing elephant"-redirect.
But I finished writing a few programs and let them sift through the entire JAXA polar ice cover data from 2002 to date...this web page I use is s "free-bee" and wont`t let me make direct URLinking to media files unle$$$$$ I pay ...so I embedded it into an html file and that went right by the ca$$$h collection

jaxagif

If You watch the gif-image You can see why the "global warmers" keep picking out 2007 on every graph they publish and show you the rest of the years as their screwy averages..
I also did a vector analysis of delta(area)/delta(time),...
and it clearly shows that the freezing season in the arctic is extended since 2007 and the "melt season has shorted"...
You can even spot it on the high-res gif watching where the peaks & valleys are...
All the missing lines, the "empty spaces" is where JAXA was parked to safeguard it from solar flare ups...(-9999 codes) and sure as shit after a bunch of those You can spot an increase in -delta(area) per time..as You would expect...with an increase of solar radiation which goes along with more sunspots and more flares=higher solar output= more heat...and reverse...
as everybody has been saying all along

The "buttons" You see on the Gif won`t do anything for You I wrote those in, so I could speed up, reverse/forward & slow down my program ...
looks really cool @ max speed...that`s where their 2007 cheat REALLY shows up...but then You won`t be able to read the year numbers


----------



## Chris (May 12, 2011)

Record Events for Thu May 5, 2011 through Wed May 11, 2011 

High Temperatures: 722 
Low Temperatures: 246 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## westwall (May 13, 2011)

Chris said:


> Record Events for Thu May 5, 2011 through Wed May 11, 2011
> 
> High Temperatures: 722
> Low Temperatures: 246
> ...



A look at mid tropospheric temps vs the lower level temps reveals that globally, the atmosphere is more unstable because of the deep level cooling that has taken place! Its that simple. The cooling in the low levels has not yet caught up to what is going on aloft, and because of that, the way to balance that out is in the form of more atmospheric fights. 




The Wild weather?Its the Cooling, ______! ( You fill in the blanks) «


----------



## skookerasbil (May 13, 2011)

nobody cares


----------



## skookerasbil (May 13, 2011)




----------



## Chris (May 14, 2011)

Record Events for Sat May 7, 2011 through Fri May 13, 2011 

High Temperatures: 966 
Low Temperatures: 51 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## Chris (May 16, 2011)

Record Events for Mon May 9, 2011 through Sun May 15, 2011 

High Temperatures: 958 
Low Temperatures: 104 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## westwall (May 16, 2011)

Chris said:


> Record Events for Mon May 9, 2011 through Sun May 15, 2011
> 
> High Temperatures: 958
> Low Temperatures: 104
> ...






It snowed here the last two days.  Far far below average temps.  The AMGEN bike race had to be canceled on Saturday due to blowing snow.

http://www.amgentourofcalifornia.co...e-1-of-the-2011-Amgen-Tour-of-California.html


----------



## ScienceRocks (May 16, 2011)

Here in the northwest we're having one of the coldest and wettest fucking springs in the last 70 years. 1 day out of every 8 are even avg this may. BRRR!!!


----------



## Old Rocks (May 16, 2011)

April was seventh warmest on record

The Earth experienced the seventh warmest April since record keeping began in 1880, as the climate phenomenon La Niña continued to be a significant factor. April&#8217;s annual Arctic sea ice extent was the fifth smallest since record keeping began in 1979, while the Antarctic sea ice extent was the fourth smallest.

The monthly analysis from NOAA&#8217;s National Climatic Data Center in Asheville, N.C., is part of the suite of climate services NOAA provides government, business and community leaders so they can make informed decisions.


----------



## Old Rocks (May 16, 2011)

A very warm Siberia.

http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2011/images/map-blended-mntp-201104.png


----------



## westwall (May 16, 2011)

Old Rocks said:


> April was seventh warmest on record
> 
> The Earth experienced the seventh warmest April since record keeping began in 1880, as the climate phenomenon La Niña continued to be a significant factor. Aprils annual Arctic sea ice extent was the fifth smallest since record keeping began in 1979, while the Antarctic sea ice extent was the fourth smallest.
> 
> The monthly analysis from NOAAs National Climatic Data Center in Asheville, N.C., is part of the suite of climate services NOAA provides government, business and community leaders so they can make informed decisions.







Three days of snow here.


----------



## westwall (May 16, 2011)

Old Rocks said:


> A very warm Siberia.
> 
> http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2011/images/map-blended-mntp-201104.png






Yeah, it's amazing how warm it is where there are no weather stations


----------



## RollingThunder (May 17, 2011)

westwall said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> > A very warm Siberia.
> ...



Denier cultspeak translation:

The reality of 5000 Russian weather stations = "_no weather stations_"


Denier cult cherry-picking & slight-of-hand through implication

'Weather stations are all important and satellite measurements somehow don't count'


----------



## Chris (May 17, 2011)

Record Events for Tue May 10, 2011 through Mon May 16, 2011 

High Temperatures: 805 
Low Temperatures: 98 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## Chris (May 17, 2011)

When the heatwave/forest fire/drought in Russia started a few weeks ago things were bad enough, with Moscow engulfed in smog the likes of which it had never seen and drought stunting crops in the countryside. Well, things have only gotten worse since then--the daily death rates doubling due to a combination of heat and unhealthy air--and finally people are starting to talk about the link with climate change.

Russian president Dmitry Medvedev at a Russian Security Council Meeting: "Everyone is talking about climate change now. Unfortunately, what is happening now in our central regions is evidence of this global climate change, because we have never in our history faced such weather conditions in the past. This means that we need to change the way we work, change the methods that we used in the past." (Mongabay)

Indeed, the Economic Times quotes the head of Russia's weather service as saying that after examining historic records, the daily highs of 100°F compared to the normal summer average of 75°F are unprecedented in 1000 years. Heat like this simply has not been known in Moscow in a millennia worth of documents. 

Moscow Death Rate Doubles From Worst Heat Wave in 1000 Years : TreeHugger


----------



## Old Rocks (May 17, 2011)

westwall said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> > A very warm Siberia.
> ...



Amazing how you lie constantly. Ever consider working for Faux?


----------



## westwall (May 17, 2011)

Old Rocks said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > Old Rocks said:
> ...







The problems with the US weather stations actually has made it into the general media and Russia used to have 15,000 weather stations, now they have 5,000.  A scientist would wonder where those other stations went.  A pseudo scientific political hack will tell you they don't matter.


Widespread Flaws in Weather Stations Networks Used to Track National Temperature Trends, Says New Study - Yahoo! News


----------



## boedicca (May 17, 2011)

My backyard thermometer here in Oaklandtown reads 50 F, which is very chilly for this time of year.

Must be all that Glowball Worming we've been hearing about.


----------



## RollingThunder (May 17, 2011)

westwall said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...



LOLOLOLOLOLOL......the title of the article is spun like cotton candy....deliciously wacky....LOLOLOL.

From the article you cited about a paper titled _Analysis Of The Impacts Of Station Exposure On The U.S. Historical Climatology Network Temperatures and Temperature Trends_:

*"While the 30-year and 115-year trends, and all groups of stations, showed warming trends over those periods, the scientists found that the minimum temperature trends appeared to be overestimated and the maximum warming trends underestimated at the poorer sites."*

And here's another recent study that reaches the same conclusions.

*On the reliability of the U.S. surface temperature record*

JOURNAL OF GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH, VOL. 115, D11108, 9 PP., 2010
doi:10.1029/2009JD013094

Matthew J. Menne - National Climatic Data Center, NOAA, Asheville, North Carolina, USA
Claude N. Williams Jr. - National Climatic Data Center, NOAA, Asheville, North Carolina, USA
Michael A. Palecki - National Climatic Data Center, NOAA, Asheville, North Carolina, USA

Abstract

*Recent photographic documentation of poor siting conditions at stations in the U.S. Historical Climatology Network (USHCN) has led to questions regarding the reliability of surface temperature trends over the conterminous United States (CONUS). To evaluate the potential impact of poor siting/instrument exposure on CONUS temperatures, trends derived from poor and well sited USHCN stations were compared. Results indicate that there is a mean bias associated with poor exposure sites relative to good exposure sites; however, this bias is consistent with previously documented changes associated with the widespread conversion to electronic sensors in the USHCN during the last 25 years. Moreover, the sign of the bias is counterintuitive to photographic documentation of poor exposure because associated instrument changes have led to an artificial negative (cool) bias in maximum temperatures and only a slight positive (warm) bias in minimum temperatures. These results underscore the need to consider all changes in observation practice when determining the impacts of siting irregularities. Further, the influence of nonstandard siting on temperature trends can only be quantified through an analysis of the data. Adjustments applied to USHCN Version 2 data largely account for the impact of instrument and siting changes, although a small overall residual negative (cool) bias appears to remain in the adjusted maximum temperature series. Nevertheless, the adjusted USHCN temperatures are extremely well aligned with recent measurements from instruments whose exposure characteristics meet the highest standards for climate monitoring. In summary, we find no evidence that the CONUS average temperature trends are inflated due to poor station siting.*

©2011. American Geophysical Union. All Rights Reserved.

(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.)


----------



## westwall (May 17, 2011)

How about 75 feet of snow on Washington State route 20?

For the supposed record heat being reported there sure is a hell of a lot of snow on the ground,  and don't try to foist off that pseudo scientific crap about warmth causing cold.
What malarkey.




Running just south of the U.S. border with Canada, youd expect the North Cascade Highway to be subject to some wintry weather occasionally.
But this weekend drivers on State Route 20  which passes from Port Townsend in west Washington State to Newport in the east  found that snow chains wouldnt be sufficient after an incredible 75 feet of snow covered a 40-mile stretch of the highway.
And the heavy snowfall could keep the road closed for another week, which would mark its latest spring reopening in 30 years.


Read more: Washington State Route 20: Highway buried under 75FEET of snow | Mail Online




Washington State Route 20: Highway buried under 75FEET of snow | Mail Online


----------



## RollingThunder (May 17, 2011)

westwall said:


> RollingThunder said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...



So first it was "*no weather stations*" and now it is "*they have 5,000*"....LOLOLOLOL....I see you're maintaining your usual standards of accuracy and clarity, walleyed....LOLOLOL.

A real scientist would ask whether or not those other weather stations make any difference, given the wide dispersal of the 5,000 in use, given that there are a lot less stations used for temperature and climate data collection in the USA, and  especially given the independent verification of the ground based measurements provided by the satellite measurements.

*The dual state nature of Russian weather stations*


***


----------



## Old Rocks (May 17, 2011)

westwall said:


> How about 75 feet of snow on Washington State route 20?
> 
> For the supposed record heat being reported there sure is a hell of a lot of snow on the ground,  and don't try to foist off that pseudo scientific crap about warmth causing cold.
> What malarkey.
> ...



*Silly ass. Nobody stated that warmth causes cold. What has been stated is that a warmer atmosphere holds more moisture and when that moisture comes out, you get more precipitation. In winter, particularly in mountain areas, the form of precipitation is snow.

We had a very strong La Nina. A strong La Nina results in a cooler Northwest, with more moisture. So, a large amount of snow in the North Cascades is hardly surprising.*

Mount Baker - World Record Snowfall

Snowfall
Although the Arctic is known as a snowy place, it is in fact a desert where very little snow actually falls. The snow that does fall, however, stays around a long time, giving the impression of much snow.

So where did the MOST snow fall?

The world record for the most snow in one year is now held by Mount Baker (elevation: 10,775 feet / 3,285 meters) in Washington State, USA. The Mount Baker Ski Area reported 1,140 inches (95 feet) / 2,896 cm (29 meters) of snowfall for the 1998-99 season.
The mountain also beat its own record for most snowfall in a month with 304 inches / 772 cm.  

Snowfall can be difficult to measure because it settles, melts, or drifts from place to place. Strict standards must be observed - a flat surface is used to measure daily snowfall amounts along with a snow stake to measure depth.

The heavy snowfalls in Washington's Cascade Mountains are the result of several factors:


Winter is the wettest season on the mild Pacific Coast, and with the west-to-east weather patterns, storms strike the Pacific Northwest frequently.

Freezing levels average about 4,000 feet / 1,220 meters over the winter months. Near that altitude snowfall amounts increases very rapidly with just small increases in elevation.

Air full of moisture after its journey across the Pacific is forced up over the Cascade Range. It cools down quickly and drops it's load.

*95 feet of snow in that very cold year of 1998-1999. LOL!!!!!     

But I enjoyed the pictures. I don't bother to go up on the Golden Horn until the melt is almost over. Very good mineral hunting there. However, even in July and August, the weather can go from a pleasant 70 to snotty snow and sleet at 35 degrees. Excellant country for late summer hypothermia.*


----------



## westwall (May 17, 2011)

RollingThunder said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > RollingThunder said:
> ...






How many of those are in Siberia?  You see dear fool, the point is not that there aren't any it's that you fraudsters choose not to use them, but  I'll let the Russians speak for themselves.

"Russia affected by Climategate

A discussion of the November 2009 Climatic Research Unit e-mail hacking incident, referred to by some sources as "Climategate," continues against the backdrop of the abortive UN Climate Conference in Copenhagen (COP15) discussing alternative agreements to replace the 1997 Kyoto Protocol that aimed to combat global warming.

The incident involved an e-mail server used by the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia (UEA) in Norwich, East England. Unknown persons stole and anonymously disseminated thousands of e-mails and other documents dealing with the global-warming issue made over the course of 13 years.

Controversy arose after various allegations were made including that climate scientists colluded to withhold scientific evidence and manipulated data to make the case for global warming appear stronger than it is.

Climategate has already affected Russia. On Tuesday, the Moscow-based Institute of Economic Analysis (IEA) issued a report claiming that the Hadley Center for Climate Change based at the headquarters of the British Meteorological Office in Exeter (Devon, England) had probably tampered with Russian-climate data.

The IEA believes that Russian meteorological-station data did not substantiate the anthropogenic global-warming theory.

Analysts say Russian meteorological stations cover most of the country's territory, and that the Hadley Center had used data submitted by only 25% of such stations in its reports.

Over 40% of Russian territory was not included in global-temperature calculations for some other reasons, rather than the lack of meteorological stations and observations.

The data of stations located in areas not listed in the Hadley Climate Research Unit Temperature UK (HadCRUT) survey often does not show any substantial warming in the late 20th century and the early 21st century.

The HadCRUT database includes specific stations providing incomplete data and highlighting the global-warming process, rather than stations facilitating uninterrupted observations.

On the whole, climatologists use the incomplete findings of meteorological stations far more often than those providing complete observations.

IEA analysts say climatologists use the data of stations located in large populated centers that are influenced by the urban-warming effect more frequently than the correct data of remote stations.

The scale of global warming was exaggerated due to temperature distortions for Russia accounting for 12.5% of the world's land mass. The IEA said it was necessary to recalculate all global-temperature data in order to assess the scale of such exaggeration.

Global-temperature data will have to be modified if similar climate-date procedures have been used from other national data because the calculations used by COP15 analysts, including financial calculations, are based on HadCRUT research."


What the Russian papers say | What Russian papers say | RIA Novosti


----------



## RollingThunder (May 18, 2011)

westwall said:


> RollingThunder said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...



You have no idea what you're talking about, you scientifically illiterate buffoon. Your articles are just more denier cult media junk. The *Institute of Economic Analysis* is a free-market, far right wing 'think tank' founded by a global warming denier and connected to the fossil fuel industry funded propaganda network in America. Their so-called analysis has been comprehensively debunked.

*Russian analysis confirms 20th century CRU temperatures *
(excerpts)

*The problem here is the IEA report does not support the claims made in the news story. I've reproduced the final graph from the report below. The red curve is the temperature trend using the 121 Russian stations that CRU has released data for, while the blue hockey stick is from a larger set of 476 stations. I've put them on top of the CRU temperatures for northern extratropics. The red and blue curves agree very well in the period after 1950, thus confirming the CRU temperatures. Well done, IEA!
*






*The red and blue curves do diverge in the 19th century, but the one that provides more support for anthropogenic global warming is the blue hockey stick. The red curve shows warming in the 19th century before there were significant CO2 emissions, so it weakens the case that global warming is man-made. If CRU (not HAdley as claimed in the Russian news story) have "tampered" with the data, it would seem that they must have been trying to make a case against AGW.

The IEA analysis is, in any case, misguided. CRU has not released all the station data they use, so the red curve is not the CRU temperature trend for Russia at all. If you want that, all you have to do is download the gridded data and average all the grid cells in Russia. You have to wonder why the IEA did not do this.

Since Russia is a pretty fair chunk of the land north of 30 degrees north, the CRU graph above is a rough approximation of the what the CRUTEM3 trends for Russia is, and you can see that it looks like the blue curve and not the red one.
*


*Finally, the truth about the Hadley/CRU data: The global temperature rise calculated by the Met Offices HadCRUT record is at the lower end of likely warming.
And the falsehoods about the Russian Institute of Economic analysis are exposed*
(excerpts)

_*The disinfomers  people like the Competitive Enterprise Institute   have been trumpeting yet more ass-backwards disinformation on this, spun from the Russian Institute of Economic Analysis (but debunked by Tim Lambert aka Deltoid and others).  Now the Met Office has buried them with a new analysis, published Friday on their website:

New evidence confirms land warming record

    New analysis released today has shown the global temperature rise calculated by the Met Offices HadCRUT record is at the lower end of likely warming. The study, carried out by ECMWF (the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts) with input from the Met Office, performs a new calculation of global temperature rise. This independent analysis is based on information from a wide range of sources. It  uses all available surface temperature measurements, together with data from sources such as satellites, radiosondes, ships and buoys.The new analysis estimates the warming to be higher than that shown from HadCRUTs more limited direct observations. This is because HadCRUT is sampling regions that have exhibited less change, on average, than the entire globe over this particular period. This provides strong evidence that recent temperature change is at least as large as estimated by HadCRUT. This conclusion is in contrast to a recently released study by the Institute of Economic Analysis (IEA) think tank based in Moscow. The IEAs output is consistent with HadCRUT as they both confirm the global warming signal in this region since 1950, which we see in many other variables and has been consistently attributed to human activities.​*​_​

***


----------



## Old Rocks (May 18, 2011)

My goodness, Ol' Walleyes has his conspiracy helmut on. The Russians are in on it, the Americans are in on it, the British are in on it, in fact, the only people that are not conspiring are me and thee, and we are not so sure of thee!


----------



## westwall (May 18, 2011)

Old Rocks said:


> My goodness, Ol' Walleyes has his conspiracy helmut on. The Russians are in on it, the Americans are in on it, the British are in on it, in fact, the only people that are not conspiring are me and thee, and we are not so sure of thee!






Well you've got the conspiracy part of it correct.  Climatologists are driving the car and they are losing because there aren't enough of them in high places to obliterate all of the evidence against them.  For a while they ruled the roost but now that they have antagonised the real scientists out there they are losing their collective asses and will continue to do so till they are recognised as the pseudo scientific frauds they are.


----------



## RollingThunder (May 18, 2011)

westwall said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> > My goodness, Ol' Walleyes has his conspiracy helmut on. The Russians are in on it, the Americans are in on it, the British are in on it, in fact, the only people that are not conspiring are me and thee, and we are not so sure of thee!
> ...



That's one of the crazy delusional stories that you denier cult dingbats tell each other but it has no relation to reality. There is no evidence against AGW and the rest of the world scientific community continues to accept, support and verify the conclusions of the climate scientists. The fact that you believe otherwise is just another measure of your insanity and brainwashed ignorance.


----------



## skookerasbil (May 18, 2011)

RollingThunder said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > Old Rocks said:
> ...




How hysterical is this?

This guy is making out like deniers are a "cult" and that AGW is a slam dunk accepted by a huge majority!!!









This reminds me of the guy at the bar watching his football team getting crushed by a score of 54 - 0 and his team scores a touchdown with 1 minute to go in the game and he starts a hysterical celebration of screaming, hooting and hollering!!!



Who cares that there is a "scientific community consensus". Its not worth a hill of rat shit s0n. Its making *ZERO impact on American public policy*..........which is the only thing that matters unless you are one who's OCD about *pissing contests*. Its 2011.........might as well be sitting around having a group navel contemplation contest


It is fascinating the level of naive with these alarmist k00ks...........that they think they matter in this day and age. 

Thunder..............you might as well be standing in your birthday suit in the middle of Siberia yelling, "FIRE"!!!!


----------



## westwall (May 18, 2011)

RollingThunder said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > Old Rocks said:
> ...






That's where you're wrong you dingbat alarmist libtard nitwit suckwad doofus banana squash(sorry, I couldn't control myself!)  There is zero empirical evidence to support AGW.  There are only computer models of proven poor quality.  So poor they are unable to recreate weather that has allready occured.  Try again, your insults and your "facts" are old and tired.


----------



## RollingThunder (May 19, 2011)

westwall said:


> RollingThunder said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...



LOLOLOLOL. You can repeat your denier cult myths all you want but they are still total bullshit. There are mountains of empirical evidence that support AGW, as almost all of the Scientific Academies, Societies and government science organizations in the world have reported.

*United States Global Change Research Program* reported in June, 2009 that:

*Observations show that warming of the climate is unequivocal. The global warming observed over the past 50 years is due primarily to human-induced emissions of heat-trapping gases. These emissions come mainly from the burning of fossil fuels (coal, oil, and gas), with important contributions from the clearing of forests, agricultural practices, and other activities.

    Climate-related changes have already been observed globally and in the United States. These include increases in air and water temperatures, reduced frost days, increased frequency and intensity of heavy downpours, a rise in sea level, and reduced snow cover, glaciers, permafrost, and sea ice. A longer ice-free period on lakes and rivers, lengthening of the growing season, and increased water vapor in the atmosphere have also been observed. Over the past 30 years, temperatures have risen faster in winter than in any other season, with average winter temperatures in the Midwest and northern Great Plains increasing more than 7°F. Some of the changes have been faster than previous assessments had suggested.*​

_*The American Geophysical Union (AGU) statement, adopted by the society in 2003 and revised in 2007, affirms that rising levels of greenhouse gases have caused and will continue to cause the global surface temperature to be warmer:

The Earth's climate is now clearly out of balance and is warming. Many components of the climate systemincluding the temperatures of the atmosphere, land and ocean, the extent of sea ice and mountain glaciers, the sea level, the distribution of precipitation, and the length of seasonsare now changing at rates and in patterns that are not natural and are best explained by the increased atmospheric abundances of greenhouse gases and aerosols generated by human activity during the 20th century. Global average surface temperatures increased on average by about 0.6°C over the period 19562006. As of 2006, eleven of the previous twelve years were warmer than any others since 1850. The observed rapid retreat of Arctic sea ice is expected to continue and lead to the disappearance of summertime ice within this century. Evidence from most oceans and all continents except Antarctica shows warming attributable to human activities. Recent changes in many physical and biological systems are linked with this regional climate change. A sustained research effort, involving many AGU members and summarized in the 2007 assessments of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, continues to improve our scientific understanding of the climate.​*​_​

*The American Meteorological Society (AMS) statement adopted by their council in 2003 said:

There is now clear evidence that the mean annual temperature at the Earth's surface, averaged over the entire globe, has been increasing in the past 200 years. There is also clear evidence that the abundance of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere has increased over the same period. In the past decade, significant progress has been made toward a better understanding of the climate system and toward improved projections of long-term climate change... Human activities have become a major source of environmental change. Of great urgency are the climate consequences of the increasing atmospheric abundance of greenhouse gases... Because greenhouse gases continue to increase, we are, in effect, conducting a global climate experiment, neither planned nor controlled, the results of which may present unprecedented challenges to our wisdom and foresight as well as have significant impacts on our natural and societal systems.[52]​​*​





westwall said:


> There are only computer models of proven poor quality.  So poor they are unable to recreate weather that has allready(sic) occured(sic).


 
In the graph below, the yellow lines show 58 temperature hindcasts from 14 different climate models. The thick red line is the average of all the hindcasts; the black line shows actual global temperature over the past century. Note how close the hindcast average is to actual temperatures. The models do a very good job of predicting 20th century climate.






Source: *IPCC AR4 WG1 Figures [PPT file]*


----------



## westwall (May 19, 2011)

RollingThunder said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > RollingThunder said:
> ...







The alarmists can make any stupid report they want to.  Hansen has been manipulating the temperature record for a couple of years now and he has been caught doing it.  It will be a bit of a wait but eventually congress will investigate his shenanigans and he will go off to prison.

All of their "predictions" are based on worthless computer models.  The next 20 years are going to be cold so your little fantasy is over buckwheat.   You clowns missed the window of opportunity the planet was providing you to ram this pseudo scientific crap down the throats of the ignorant.

Mother Nature screwed you though and cooled off before you could get your goals accomplished...so sad for you but great for the people of this planet and the planet itself...which mocks you and your ilk.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (May 19, 2011)

Chris said:


> Record Events for Mon Mar 14, 2011 through Sun Mar 20, 2011
> 
> High Temperatures: 537
> Low Temperatures: 11
> ...



The temp in my home town had a record three weeks ago record cold of 38 degrees.


----------



## Old Rocks (May 20, 2011)

And when the temperature in my home town hits -38, it is not a record at all. In the winter, that is.


----------



## Old Rocks (May 20, 2011)

westwall said:


> RollingThunder said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...



*Going to remind you of this prediction monthly, Walleyes. Kind of like your statements concerning the lack of a meltdown in the Japanese reactors. Both you and BiPolar completely zeroed out on that. Demonstrates the lack of knowledge on both your parts.*


----------



## westwall (May 20, 2011)

Old Rocks said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > RollingThunder said:
> ...





  Where did I ever say there wasn't meltdown occuring?  You nitwit, I was merely pointing out that people didn't need to panic about the radioactive cloud crossing the Pacific and killing everybody.  God you are a doofus.  And feel free to keep reminding us of how the record warm temps are beating us down as the grape production in CA and general food production declines due to COLD that the warmists will be erasing.  They just can't erase the effects.  So sad for them.


----------



## RollingThunder (May 20, 2011)

westwall said:


> RollingThunder said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...


Wow, that's even more stunningly insane than your usual drivel and nonsense, walleyed. You have quite a collection of denier cult fantasies with no foundation in reality. Dr. Hansen work has been repeatedly verified by other researchers, he was not "_caught_" "_manipulating the temperature records_", temperature records are kept by a number of agencies and governments around the world and the different record sets kept by different organizations are in substantial agreement. If anyone goes to jail in the future, it will likely be some oil corp executives on charges of 'crimes against humanity'.





westwall said:


> All of their "predictions" are based on worthless computer models.


You keep claiming that the computer models used in modern climate science are worthless without ever offering any evidence to back up that claim. You have no evidence to offer because there isn't any. That belief is just one of the dogmas of your cultic faith. I keep pointing out, as I did above, that the computer models actually have a good track record and have demonstrated their basic validity by accurately hindcasting the climate patterns of the 20th century. Unlike you with your phony claims, I cite actual scientific evidence and studies.






westwall said:


> The next 20 years are going to be cold so your little fantasy is over buckwheat.   You clowns missed the window of opportunity the planet was providing you to ram this pseudo scientific crap down the throats of the ignorant.


You silly denier cult dingbats are always claiming that the world is about to start cooling, any day now, but somehow every year continues to be well above the average for the last century and every decade continues to be, in turn, the warmest decade on record. Globally, the ice continues to melt at increasing rates almost everywhere, sea levels continue to rise at an increasing rate, and all of the other indicators point to a warming world. The next twenty years are going to be warmer and even warmer. It is a good bet that 2012 will be another record setting hot year.






westwall said:


> Mother Nature screwed you though and cooled off before you could get your goals accomplished...so sad for you but great for the people of this planet and the planet itself...which mocks you and your ilk.


You are so lost in "de' nile" that the crocodiles must have already eaten your brains. What cooling, nitwit??? 2010 was tied with 2005 as the hottest year on record.

It would indeed be great for the planet and for all of us if you fruitcakes were somehow right and the world cooled off in the coming decades but alas, physics makes that impossible at this point. 





westwall said:


> And feel free to keep reminding us of how the record warm temps are beating us down as the grape production in CA and general food production declines due to COLD that the warmists will be erasing.  They just can't erase the effects.  So sad for them.


What "COLD", retard??? Food production worldwide is declining because of warming.


_*U.S. farmers dodge the impacts of global warming  at least for now, Stanford researcher says
The United States seems to have been lucky so far in largely escaping the impact of global warming on crop production. But for most major agricultural producing countries, the rising temperatures have already reduced their yields of corn and wheat compared to what they would have produced if there had been no warming, according to a new study led by Stanford researchers.*_

Stanford University News Service
May 4, 2011
(excerpts)

*Global warming is likely already taking a toll on world wheat and corn production, according to a new study led by Stanford University researchers. But the United States, Canada and northern Mexico have largely escaped the trend. "It appears as if farmers in North America got a pass on the first round of global warming," said David Lobell, an assistant professor of environmental Earth system science at Stanford University. "That was surprising, given how fast we see weather has been changing in agricultural areas around the world as a whole." Russia, India and France suffered the greatest drops in wheat production relative to what might have been with no global warming. The largest comparative losses in corn production were seen in China and Brazil.

Since 1950, the average global temperature has increased at a rate of roughly 0.13 degrees Celsius per decade. But over the next two to three decades average global temperature is expected to rise approximately 50 percent faster than that, according to the report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. With that rate of temperature change, it is unlikely that the crop-growing regions of the United States will continue to escape the rising temperatures, Lobell said.*


----------



## westwall (May 20, 2011)

RollingThunder said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > RollingThunder said:
> ...








I wonder if you actually read the story in your link?  Let me share some exerpts for you....

"The United States seems to have been lucky so far in largely escaping the impact of global warming on crop production. But for most major agricultural producing countries, the rising temperatures have already reduced their yields of corn and wheat compared to what they would have produced if there had been no warming, according to a new study led by Stanford researchers."

I wonder how they came to that conclusion?  I find it amazing that the most recorded area on the planet has seen no appreciable warming (defying the warming of the rest of the planet) kind of makes one wonder how the rest of the globe can warm and the US magically not warm.  I wonder how the physics of that would work.  I also find it interesting that they say the decline (actually there has been no decline, just the rate of food increase production has slowed) is solely do to warmthwhen we have the experience of Brazil which produces very large quantities of food while enjoying an average temperature 6 degrees warmer then the US.

"Lobell and his colleagues examined temperature and precipitation records since 1980 for major crop-growing countries in the places and times of year when crops are grown. They then used crop models to estimate what worldwide crop yields would have been had temperature and precipitation had typical fluctuations around 1980 levels."

Yep you guessed it, there are those ubiquitous computer models again.

"The researchers found that global wheat production was 5.5 percent lower than it would have been had the climate remained stable, and global corn production was lower by almost 4 percent. Global rice and soybean production were not significantly affected."

Ahh yes 5.5 percent lower then it *would have been*....and how exactly did they calculate that?  We know they used models but what about the actual research that supports this contention?

The United States, which is the world's largest producer of soybeans and corn, accounting for roughly 40 percent of global production, experienced a very slight cooling trend and no significant production impacts.

"Outside of North America, most major producing countries were found to have experienced some decline in wheat and corn (or maize) yields related to the rise in global temperature. "Yields in most countries are still going up, but not as fast as we estimate they would be without climate trends," Lobell said."

Amazing how only the US experienced a cooling trend while the rest of the world supposedly heated up.  And might there be other reasons for the decline in production?  Like farmers planting other crops for economic reasons?

Russia, India and France suffered the greatest drops in wheat production relative to what might have been with no global warming. The largest comparative losses in corn production were seen in China and Brazil.

"Total worldwide relative losses of the two crops equal the annual production of corn in Mexico and wheat in France. Together, the four crops in the study  wheat, corn, soybeans and rice  constitute approximately 75 percent of the calories that humans worldwide consume, directly or indirectly through livestock, according to research cited in the study."

This is a very telling paragraph.  Alluding to Russia and India with their crop losses due to the recent blocking (which even NOAA said was not GW related) but more interesting is Brazil which is an example of not telling the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.  Brazil has indeed seen a decline in food crops *BECAUSE THEY ARE PLANTING SUGERCANE FOR BIOFUEL PRODUCTION.* So here we have a blatant case of misinformation.

To develop their estimates, the researchers used publicly available global data sets from the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization and from the University of Delaware, University of Wisconsin and McGill University.

The researchers also estimated the economic effects of the changes in crop yield using models of commodity markets.

Yep, more ubiquitous computer models.  I excised out a bunch of blather about while the corn belt has seemed to magically escape any warming over the last 50 years they will eventually warm up.  No discusion about how this magical bubble over the corn belt was created though.


"We found that since 1980, the effects of climate change on crop yields have caused an increase of approximately 20 percent in global market prices," said Wolfram Schlenker, an economist at Columbia University and a co-author of the paper in Science. 

He said if the beneficial effects of higher carbon dioxide levels on crop growth are factored into the calculation, the increase drops down to 5 percent."

Interesting how inflation wasn't considered but then we're not talking about a legit scientist here are we?

I find it amazing that supposedly thinking people can read a story like this and not just instinctively rip it to shreds.  What ever happened to that wonderful paradigm of "question authority".


----------



## RollingThunder (May 20, 2011)

westwall said:


> RollingThunder said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...


Why yes, walleyed, I did read the article about the study by the Stanford scientists but you make it plain that you may have read it but your comprehension was piss poor. But go ahead, it's always amusing to watch one of you scientifically ignorant denier cultists try to critique the research of actual scientists by analyzing the wording of an article about their research.




westwall said:


> Let me share some exerpts for you....
> 
> "The United States seems to have been lucky so far in largely escaping the impact of global warming on crop production. But for most major agricultural producing countries, the rising temperatures have already reduced their yields of corn and wheat compared to what they would have produced if there had been no warming, according to a new study led by Stanford researchers."
> 
> I wonder how they came to that conclusion?


I'm sure you do!!! Given how extremely ignorant about science and the scientific process you are and your general low level of intelligence, it all must be quite puzzling to you.





westwall said:


> I find it amazing that the most recorded area on the planet has seen no appreciable warming (defying the warming of the rest of the planet) kind of makes one wonder how the rest of the globe can warm and the US magically not warm.  I wonder how the physics of that would work.


The USA only covers about 2% of the Earth's surface so it's not as big a deal as you imagine. And again, I'm sure you find a lot of scientific facts that you can't comprehend very "_amazing_" and you must "_wonder_" about almost everything that you're too ignorant and dimwitted to understand.





westwall said:


> I also find it interesting that they say the decline (actually there has been no decline, just the rate of food increase production has slowed) is solely do(sic) to warmthwhen we have the experience of Brazil which produces very large quantities of food while enjoying an average temperature 6 degrees warmer then the US.


The article makes clear that a substantially lesser amount of food is being produced in many parts of the world than the amount that would have been produced in the absence of global warming and the article (even the bit I quoted) mentions Brazil specifically.

*"The researchers found that global wheat production was 5.5 percent lower than it would have been had the climate remained stable, and global corn production was lower by almost 4 percent."

"Total worldwide relative losses of the two crops equal the annual production of corn in Mexico and wheat in France."

"The largest comparative losses in corn production were seen in China and Brazil."*






westwall said:


> "Lobell and his colleagues examined temperature and precipitation records since 1980 for major crop-growing countries in the places and times of year when crops are grown. They then used crop models to estimate what worldwide crop yields would have been had temperature and precipitation had typical fluctuations around 1980 levels."
> 
> Yep you guessed it, there are those ubiquitous computer models again.


Yep, computer modeling is a fairly ubiquitous scientific technique at this point in time and is used in a great many areas of study including *crop modeling*. The reason computer modeling is so widely used is that it works. Computer models have their limitations but they have demonstrated the ability to reflect real world events fairly accurately in many fields of study and application. You anti-science denier cult nitwits sneer at everything in science that you can't understand and so if a computer model is mentioned, you imagine that that is something negative that, by itself, invalidates the the rest of the research. But that is just your insanity and ignorance talking. 






westwall said:


> "The researchers found that global wheat production was 5.5 percent lower than it would have been had the climate remained stable, and global corn production was lower by almost 4 percent. Global rice and soybean production were not significantly affected."
> 
> Ahh yes 5.5 percent lower then it *would have been*....and how exactly did they calculate that?  We know they used models but what about the actual research that supports this contention?
> 
> ...



*"how exactly did they calculate that?"*....pretty much sums up your ignorance. You speculate wildly in the absence of any actual facts and without looking at the actual research paper but only going by a news release about the research and then try to imply that because you're so ignorant about how they arrive at their results then the scientists must not be "_legit_" scientists and they must have forgotten to consider important factors like "_inflation_" (which you know because the word wasn't mentioned in an article about the research...LOL).

*"Alluding to Russia and India with their crop losses due to the recent blocking..."*????? "_Blocking_"??? What are you mumbling about now, walleyedretard? Russia's crop losses last year were partly the result of wildfires that were directly linked to global warming/climate change. But this study I cited covers a longer period and is looking at trends over years.

*"Brazil has indeed seen a decline in food crops BECAUSE THEY ARE PLANTING SUGERCANE FOR BIOFUEL PRODUCTION. So here we have a blatant case of misinformation."*....yeah but, as usual, the blatant attempt at misinformation is yours. Brazil developed its ethanol economy decades ago and is not now currently transferring any significant amount of land from food production to sugar cane production.

*Ethanol in Brazil: The World's First Sustainable Biofuels Economy*
(excerpt)

*Brazilians have never considered sugar a basic food staple, such as rice, wheat or corn, but rather just a food sweetener, so it does not play a key role to combat world hunger. The government, the private sector and the Brazilian press joint position defend sugarcane-based ethanol, claiming their ethanol was not the villain of the story. After the peak of the food vs. fuels debate last April to May, reports (links go directly to PDF reports) from the World Bank, OECD, and even the British NGO Oxfam did not put any blame on sugarcane ethanol for the increase of food prices, or for lack of sustainability. The World Bank report concludes that sugarcane based ethanol has not raised sugar prices significantly, as almost half the sugar cane harvested goes to sugar production and the other half to ethanol, not affecting world supply, as Brazil is the first sugar producer in the world.*


----------



## westwall (May 20, 2011)

RollingThunder said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > RollingThunder said:
> ...







Well looky here.  Numbnuts can't add or subtract either.  Here's a primer for you moron.  The planet Earth has 139,668,500 square miles of ocean.  It further has 57,268,900 square miles of land.  The US constitutes 3,794,083 square miles of land which the last time I checked equates out to 6.6% of the total land area.  Now if you wish to remove Alaska's 586,400 square miles that drops the total down to 5.6% of the total land area.

How on earth you think that people are going to take you seriously when you can't even get a simple fact like that straight is beyond me but it certainly points out the pervasive inability to do simple math and points out your clowns' particular personality disorder.

When you can get a simple fact straight by all means come back but this is a ridiculously stupid mistake I would expect from a grade schooler.

What a complete and utter failure of the public education system.  My gosh but you are an idiot!


----------



## RollingThunder (May 20, 2011)

westwall said:


> RollingThunder said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...



LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL.....ROTFLMAO.....

Hey walleyedretard, take all of those insults, multiply them by ten, and apply them to yourself. 

*Surface Area of the Earth
The total surface area of the Earth is 510 million square kilometers.*

*Surface Area of the Earth
Total surface area of earth: 510,072,000 sq km [= 316,944,046.766 sq mi]

    * Total water surface area: 70.8% (361,132,000 sq km) [= 224,397,021 sq mi]
    * Total land surface area: 29.2% (148,940,000 sq km) [= 92,547,025 sq mi]*

*Percentage Calculator*

US surface area = 3,794,083 square miles
Earth surface area = 316,944,946 sq mi

*3,794,083 is what percentage of 316,944,946 = 1.197%

How on earth you think that people are going to take you seriously when you can't even get a simple fact like that straight is beyond me but it certainly points out the pervasive inability to do simple math and points out your clowns' particular personality disorder.

When you can get a simple fact straight by all means come back but this is a ridiculously stupid mistake I would expect from a grade schooler.

What a complete and utter failure of the public education system. My gosh but you are an idiot!*


----------



## westwall (May 20, 2011)

RollingThunder said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > RollingThunder said:
> ...







Yes you are an idiot, you can't even find simple facts you dipshit!





Best Answer - Chosen by Asker

Earth has a surface area of 196,940,400 square miles, slightly less than a perfect ball with a diameter of 7913.5 miles .

The surface area of the seven continents and all the islands of the world is about 57 million miles, while the total area of the six habitable continents (Antarctica excluded) is around 52 million square miles. 

Including Antarctica , over one fifth of the globe's land mass is under water (oceans, lakes, rivers, etc.) or ice. This leaves about 45 million square miles of exposed land. 

The human population on earth has crossed six billion. If we distribute all the exposed land evenly among all mankind, 133 people would have to share one square mile. What that means is that every single person on Earth, man woman and child would have close to five acres of land for his or her use. More precisely, each person would get 209,000 square feet of land, or a square plot of land 457 feet on each side. 

Not all this land can be used beneficially however. A significant portion of the Earth's exposed land is unhabitable or cannot be used for any agricultural purpose. Large portions lie in the far north. Large portions are extremely arid. Large portions are very mountainous. In sum, only about one fourth of all the land on earth, or somewhat more than 12 million square miles, is arable.

Land mass refers to the total area of a country or geographical region (which may include discontinuous pieces of land such as islands). The Earth's total land mass is 148,939,063.133 km² (57,511,026.002 square miles) which is about 29.2% of its total surface. Water covers approximately 70.8% of the Earth's surface, mostly in the form of oceans.


The World  57,308,738 Sq. Miles (148,429,000 Sq. Km) 100% 
Asia (plus the Middle East) 17,212,000 Sq. Miles (44,579,000 Sq. Km) 30.0% 
Africa  11,608,000 Sq. Miles (30,065,000 Sq. Km) 20.3% 
North America  9,365,000 Sq. Miles (24,256,000 Sq. Km) 16.3% 
South America  6,880,000 Sq. Miles (17,819,000 Sq. Km) 12.0% 
Antarctica  5,100,000 Sq. Miles (13,209,000 Sq. Km) 8.9% 
Europe  3,837,000 Sq. Miles (9,938,000 Sq. Km) 6.7% 
Australia (plus Oceania) 2,968,000 Sq. Miles (7,687,000 Sq. Km) 5.2% 


The Continents: Land Area -ZoomSchool.com

Land mass - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

How many square miles are on the Earth's surface? - Yahoo! Answers


*LEARN HOW TO DO BASIC RESEARCH YOU DIPSHIT!*


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (May 20, 2011)

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=97rBCVtOE78]YouTube - &#x202a;Monckton Refutes Abraham: Part 6: The Medieval Warm Period&#x202c;&rlm;[/ame]


----------



## RollingThunder (May 20, 2011)

westwall said:


> RollingThunder said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...



LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL......my god but you're retarded. You apparently can't "_do basic research"_ well enough to find your own ass with a roadmap and a GPS. 

"_Yahoo Answers - Best Answer - Chosen by Asker_" is your idea of solid research, eh? LOLOLOL. No, you poor deluded fool, your "answer" from some anonymous goofball is wrong. Earth does not have "_a surface area of 196,940,400 square miles_", it has a surface area of 316,944,046.766 sq mi, as can be easily proven.

Even one of the links you cited disproves your silly delusion. You cited: Land mass - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia but you apparently can't read simple English. The page says: "_The Earth's total land mass is 148,939,063.133 km² (57,511,026.002 square miles) which is about 29.2% of its total surface._" If you calculate how much the "_total surface_" area is if the total land mass area of 148,939,063 km2 is 29.2% of it, it turns out to be 510,065,284. km2.

Your other link to enchantedlearning.com is a link to a page that lists some information about the land area of the continents. NOT the total surface area of the Earth. That figure is not mentioned.

*Earth - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Surface area, 510072000 km2.*

*What is the total surface area of Earth? - Answers.com
Surface Area of Earth: 510,065,600 km2 (see related link) of which 148,939,100 km2 (29.2 %) is land and 361,126,400 km2 (70.8 %) is water.
Surface area, 510072000 km2.*

*World Atlas
planet earth
Surface Area of the Planet (510,066,000 sq km)
Land Area on the Planet (148,647,000 sq km) 29.1%
Ocean Area (335,258,000 sq km)*

*Hawai'i Institute of Geophysics and Planetology, University of Hawai'i
Earth - Surface area - 510 million square km*

*Algebra.com
Calculate the surface area of the earth if the radius of the earth is 6400 kilometers
Surface area formula: SA = 4 x pi x R squared
SA = 4 x 3.1417 x 6400 x 6400
SA = 514,718,540.5 sq/km*

*Nationmaster.com - Encyclopedia - Earth
Physical characteristics
Surface area: 	510,065,600 km²
148,939,100 km² land  (29.2 %)
361,126,400 km² water (70.8 %)*


So, walleyedretard, I guess you must have been talking to yourself when you said:
*LEARN HOW TO DO BASIC RESEARCH YOU DIPSHIT!*


----------



## Trakar (May 23, 2011)

Presuming that this thread is still on-topic with regards to "Record Temps":

am I correct in assuming that NOAA's assessment of April has been seen by all?

"April was seventh warmest on record
May 16, 2011

The Earth experienced the seventh warmest April since record keeping began in 1880, as the climate phenomenon La Niña continued to be a significant factor. Aprils annual Arctic sea ice extent was the fifth smallest since record keeping began in 1979, while the Antarctic sea ice extent was the fourth smallest.

The monthly analysis from NOAAs National Climatic Data Center in Asheville, N.C., is part of the suite of climate services NOAA provides government, business and community leaders so they can make informed decisions..."

April was seventh warmest on record

While April temps don't, in themselves, constitute a new record, they are a part of a record setting 314 straight months where the average global monthly temperature has been above the 20th century global average temperature! (last month with a below average temperature was February 1985)


----------



## Old Rocks (May 23, 2011)

Hi Trakar.   Oh, they have seen it all right. They just claim that NASA and NOAA are part of some global conspiracy. And then there are people like Ian that feature Dr. Sprencer's graph in his avatar, claiming that it shows cooling since 1998.

The fact that we have just had a very strong La Nina, yet only had three negative numbers by Spencer's graph just doesn't seem to penetrate into their skulls. The seventh warmest April on record, a continues record for 314 months of temperatures above the 20th Century average doesn't mean anything to them. 

The Gulf waters are about 2 degrees F warmer than average now, and we are in a neutral Enso at the moment. Possible that we might see another 2005 hurricane season.

US NODC Coastal Water Temperature Guide


----------



## Old Rocks (May 23, 2011)

April was seventh warmest on record

Global Temperature Highlights &#8211; Year-to-date
The combined global land and ocean average surface temperature for the year to date (January &#8211; April 2011) was 0.86 F (0.48 C) above the 20th century average of 54.8 F (12.6 C), making it the 14th warmest on record. The margin of error is +/- 0.16 F (0.09 C).


The year-to-date worldwide land surface temperature was 1.33 F (0.74 C) above the 20th century average &#8212; the 17th warmest such period on record. The margin of error is +/- 0.36 F (0.20 C). Warmer-than-average conditions were particularly felt across the southern half of Greenland, Siberia, northern Mexico, the southern United States and across Africa. Cooler-than-average regions included central Canada, the northern United States, western Russia, Kazakhstan, Mongolia, extreme southeast Asia and most of Australia. 
The global ocean surface temperature for the year-to-date was 0.68 F (0.38 C) above the 20th century average and was the 11th warmest such period on record. The margin of error is +/-0.07 F (0.04 C). The warmth was most pronounced across parts of the most of the western Pacific Ocean, the tropical Atlantic Ocean, the North Atlantic near Greenland and Canada, and the southern mid-latitude oceans. 


La Niña conditions continued to weaken in April for the fourth consecutive month, although sea-surface temperatures remained below normal across the central and eastern equatorial Pacific Ocean. According to NOAA&#8217;s Climate Prediction Center, La Niña will continue to have global impacts as the event continues to decline, but by late spring neither La Niña nor El Niño conditions are expected to prevail in the region. 


Effective May 2, 2011, NOAA updated its monthly mean temperature dataset, which is used to calculate global land surface temperature anomalies and trends. The Global Historical Climate Network-Monthly (GHCN-M) version 3 dataset replaced GHCN-M version 2. Beginning with this month&#8217;s Global State of the Climate Report, GHCN-M version 3 is used for National Climatic Data Center climate monitoring products.  More information on this transition can be found at: GHCN Monthly.


----------



## Trakar (May 24, 2011)

Old Rocks said:


> Hi Trakar.   Oh, they have seen it all right. They just claim that NASA and NOAA are part of some global conspiracy. And then there are people like Ian that feature Dr. Sprencer's graph in his avatar, claiming that it shows cooling since 1998.
> 
> The fact that we have just had a very strong La Nina, yet only had three negative numbers by Spencer's graph just doesn't seem to penetrate into their skulls. The seventh warmest April on record, a continues record for 314 months of temperatures above the 20th Century average doesn't mean anything to them.
> 
> ...



Hey yourself!

Yeah I've been rather busy, I'm down in N. Ca for a couple of weeks, which means a lot of free time and not much into watching television, now that California has a ban on dredging I probably won't be doing any prospecting, but I plan on spending all my free time this summer playing with my trommel and pans when I get back to the homestead!

I don't know about the hurricanes, the water temps in the gulf are scary but the African dust and the upper level vertical shears just don't look conducive to a lot of big cyclones/storms,...at least not yet,...and that could all change in a matter of weeks and peak season doesn't even start until August. If they get into the Gulf with sea surface temps like they are currently trending, the old maps ("beyond here there be Dragons") may be understating the case! 

Climate Prediction Center - Atlantic Hurricane Outlook Update

The Post and Courier - Hurricane forecast: Storms, and lots of them: Printer-friendly version - Charleston SC - postandcourier.com


----------



## Chris (May 29, 2011)

Record Events for Sun May 22, 2011 through Sat May 28, 2011 

High Temperatures: 410 
Low Temperatures: 110 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## Chris (May 30, 2011)

Record Events for Mon May 23, 2011 through Sun May 29, 2011 

High Temperatures: 454 
Low Temperatures: 122 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## skookerasbil (May 30, 2011)

RollingThunder said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > RollingThunder said:
> ...











Not sure anybody else has noticed...........but I most defintately have.

As the environmentalist inflcuence on public policy has fallen on its face the last 2 years, has anybody else noticed how the posts by the k00ks have become perfect illustrations of angst squared? Now.....you're not an "idiot" if you dont agree with them,  you're an idiot in 7 pt. font. And then the numbers.................get aload of the the numbers thrown at you in their posts. Then of course.............the same 7 or 8 links posted up over.............and over.............and over............and over.............and over. THE SAME LAME SHIT THEYVE BEEN POSTING UP FOR YEARS!!!

They're NOT winning and theyre pissed!!! In fact, you could say they are melting down daily.

Too..........they have started a strategy of starting new threads when in the old threads, they have been made to look like circus clowns by creative wizards like me, Daveman, Ian, Polar Bear, Crusader, Westwall et. al.


Just like Obama.............the worm has turned and its escalator down for the k00k left fringe of this country. Soon........their shit is going to be in a museum, in a glass case propped up like relic from a former era!!!

And all the while............Ive been saying for 10 years this shit would be exposed as a gigantic scam and end up being a historical fad. Its turning out just the way I said it would 10 fcukking years ago!!!


----------



## sparky (May 30, 2011)

It's not the heat, it's the stupidity....


----------



## boedicca (May 30, 2011)

And here in Oaklandtown we continue to have a much cooler than usual Spring (if one can call it that).

Today's forecast high temp is three degrees below the average for today, and 26 degrees below the record high.

I could use me some Glowball Wirming.


----------



## RollingThunder (May 30, 2011)

boedicca said:


> And here in Oaklandtown we continue to have a much cooler than usual Spring (if one can call it that).
> 
> Today's forecast high temp is three degrees below the average for today, and 26 degrees below the record high.
> 
> I could use me some Glowball Wirming.



Actually *you* could use some 'no-bull worming'.


----------



## Old Rocks (May 30, 2011)

boedicca said:


> And here in Oaklandtown we continue to have a much cooler than usual Spring (if one can call it that).
> 
> Today's forecast high temp is three degrees below the average for today, and 26 degrees below the record high.
> 
> I could use me some Glowball Wirming.




Fairbanks, Alaska

75 today, 79, tomorrow, and 81 degrees Wednesday.

Fairbanks, Alaska (99701) Weather Forecast & Conditions


----------



## Chris (May 30, 2011)

Record Events for Mon May 23, 2011 through Sun May 29, 2011 

High Temperatures: 508 
Low Temperatures: 131 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## Chris (Jun 1, 2011)

Record Events for Wed May 25, 2011 through Tue May 31, 2011 

High Temperatures: 666 
Low Temperatures: 162 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## skookerasbil (Jun 1, 2011)

The dummies think winning a debate about the data in 2011 is spiking the football for a cause. 

Awesome..........but the factual reality is that the public is now overwhelmingly yawning at "the data from real scientists". So much so in fact that they've fallen asleep. Two weeks ago in another thread, I asked them to post up one single link refuting this.......still havent seen dick but lots of post, "Skooks is a retard!"

This shit of posting up numbers has become...........................

*NOTHING

MORE

THAN

A 

HOBBY*


ITS NOT 2007 ANYMORE s0ns!!!!












Research Panel Says Climate Change Doubts Slow Urgent Action - Bloomberg


Placing the Blame for Death of Cap-and-Trade | Miller-McCune


*"But much of science runs on government money. Some people find the stink of bias only in private money, and see government as free of it, but they are mistaken. Government likes certain beliefs. To get its money, you have to get the approval of the scientists it selects, and you are less likely to get it if they think your idea wrong"*.


The Government Grant System: Inhibitor of Truth and Innovation? | Reprint


----------



## Trakar (Jun 1, 2011)

skookerasbil said:


> The dummies think winning a debate about the data in 2011 is spiking the football for a cause.
> 
> Awesome..........but the factual reality is that the public is now overwhelmingly yawning at "the data from real scientists". So much so in fact that they've fallen asleep. Two weeks ago in another thread, I asked them to post up one single link refuting this......



Sorry, I generally skip over the cartoon posts so I may have missed your "glove in the mud."

The following should help reassure you that not everyone in America is a braindead idiot.

*Poll: American Opinion on Climate Change Warms Up*
Poll: American Opinion on Climate Change Warms Up


> ...Americans who said President Obama and Congress should make developing sources of clean energy a high priority increased 11 points, to 71%, while those who said that global warming should be a high priority rose six points, to 44%. In a seven-point increase since January, 69% of Americans said that the United States should make a large or medium effort to reduce global warming even if it incurs large or moderate economic costs.
> 
> Current public support for specific policy options (and changes since January, 2010) include:
> 
> ...


----------



## Chris (Jun 1, 2011)

Record Events for Wed May 25, 2011 through Tue May 31, 2011 

High Temperatures: 778 
Low Temperatures: 185 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## Chris (Jun 1, 2011)

PARISFrance's record drought is threatening electricity supplies, as low water levels reduce hydroelectric power and make it hard to cool nuclear plants, widening the potential impact of the hottest, driest spring in memory.

The warning came as neighboring Germany, from which France often buys electricity, shutters some of its nuclear capacity, effectively eliminating its reserve capacity. 

."We shouldn't be alarmist, but we should be vigilant," French Energy Minister Eric Besson Besson told a French radio show. 

Europe is facing growing economic threats from this year's extreme weather. France has had the hottest spring in memory, according to its weather agency, with average temperatures in March-May 2.6 Celsius above the average between 1971 and 2000; and rainfall just 45% of the average over that period. 

Record Heat Costs France - WSJ.com


----------



## Chris (Jun 3, 2011)

Record Events for Fri May 27, 2011 through Thu Jun 2, 2011 

High Temperatures: 1100 
Low Temperatures: 204 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## Chris (Jun 5, 2011)

Record Events for Sun May 29, 2011 through Sat Jun 4, 2011 

High Temperatures: 1314 
Low Temperatures: 265 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## skookerasbil (Jun 6, 2011)

Chris said:


> PARISFrance's record drought is threatening electricity supplies, as low water levels reduce hydroelectric power and make it hard to cool nuclear plants, widening the potential impact of the hottest, driest spring in memory.
> 
> The warning came as neighboring Germany, from which France often buys electricity, shutters some of its nuclear capacity, effectively eliminating its reserve capacity.
> 
> ...




lmao......says the "energy Minister"!!!!

I always said this guy has the political IQ of a small soap dish...........

INTERVIEW-W.Bank to suggest CO2 levy on jet, shipping fuel | Energy & Oil | Reuters


As Polar says...........guys like Chris dabble in Numerology.Temperature data is just that and only that when the public doesnt give a rats ass about doing anything about it EVEN IF IT WERE VERIFIED TO BE 100% CERTAIN ( which of course, its not).

s0n.........you're one of those guys who they say are "booksmart". They are a dime a dozen in this world. Time to get a little more versatile.


----------



## Old Rocks (Jun 6, 2011)

Now Kooky, no reason to worry, no one takes you to be smart in any way.


----------



## skookerasbil (Jun 6, 2011)

Old Rocks said:


> Now Kooky, no reason to worry, no one takes you to be smart in any way.



Cool..........but I'll be hanging around here making sure the curious dont get duped. And publically humiliating you in the process s0n!!!


----------



## RollingThunder (Jun 6, 2011)

skookerasbil said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> > Now Kooky, no reason to worry, no one takes you to be smart in any way.
> ...


You mean you'll be hanging around here trying to dupe the gullible but generally being too lame to even do that.

The only one you have ever humiliated with the braindead nonsense you post is yourself but you are too much of a clueless moron to be able to see that.


----------



## Chris (Jun 6, 2011)

Record Events for Mon May 30, 2011 through Sun Jun 5, 2011 

High Temperatures: 1380 
Low Temperatures: 260 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## Chris (Jun 7, 2011)

Record Events for Tue May 31, 2011 through Mon Jun 6, 2011 

High Temperatures: 1617 
Low Temperatures: 259 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## Chris (Jun 8, 2011)

High temperatures were expected to continue to grip the Green Bay area today, a day after a record June 7 high of 97 degrees gripped the Green Bay area, and the heat index reached triple digits.

Temperatures of 97 also were recorded in Waupaca, Fond du Lac, Stevens Point and Mosinee.
Green Bay firefighters responded to several heat-related medical calls Tuesday, Battalion Chief Ed Jarosz said.

Record heat cooks Green Bay | Green Bay Press Gazette | greenbaypressgazette.com


----------



## Chris (Jun 9, 2011)

Record Events for Thu Jun 2, 2011 through Wed Jun 8, 2011 

High Temperatures: 1732 
Low Temperatures: 192 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## Chris (Jun 9, 2011)

The mercury climbed into the 90s across half the nation Wednesday in a record-breaking blast of August-like heat, forcing schools with no air conditioning to let kids go home early and cities to open cooling centers. 

Baltimore and Washington hit 99 degrees, breaking high-temperature records for the date that were set in 1999, according to the National Weather Service. The normal high for the date is about 82.

Philadelphia hit 97 degrees, breaking a 2008 record of 95, and Atlantic City, N.J., tied a record of 98 set in 1999. Chicago reached 94 by midafternoon.

Half the country sizzles in record heat


----------



## skookerasbil (Jun 9, 2011)

Chris said:


> The mercury climbed into the 90s across half the nation Wednesday in a record-breaking blast of August-like heat, forcing schools with no air conditioning to let kids go home early and cities to open cooling centers.
> 
> Baltimore and Washington hit 99 degrees, breaking high-temperature records for the date that were set in 1999, according to the National Weather Service. The normal high for the date is about 82.
> 
> ...






Effects from outgoing LaNina, the worst on record in February..........


'Wild and weird' weather leaves its mark - USATODAY.com


----------



## skookerasbil (Jun 9, 2011)

Chris said:


> Record Events for Thu Jun 2, 2011 through Wed Jun 8, 2011
> 
> High Temperatures: 1732
> Low Temperatures: 192
> ...


----------



## Chris (Jun 9, 2011)

Half the country sizzles in record heat...

The mercury climbed into the 90s across half the nation Wednesday in a record-breaking blast of August-like heat, forcing schools with no air conditioning to let kids go home early and cities to open cooling centers. 

Baltimore and Washington hit 99 degrees, breaking high-temperature records for the date that were set in 1999, according to the National Weather Service. The normal high for the date is about 82.

Philadelphia hit 97 degrees, breaking a 2008 record of 95, and Atlantic City, N.J., tied a record of 98 set in 1999. Chicago reached 94 by midafternoon.

Half the country sizzles in record heat


----------



## daveman (Jun 9, 2011)

The Twentieth Century Reanalysis Project - Compo - 2011 - Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society - Wiley Online Library

Abstract
The Twentieth Century Reanalysis (20CR) project is an international effort to produce a comprehensive global atmospheric circulation dataset spanning the twentieth century, assimilating only surface pressure reports and using observed monthly sea-surface temperature and sea-ice distributions as boundary conditions. It is chiefly motivated by a need to provide an observational dataset with quantified uncertainties for validations of climate model simulations of the twentieth century on all time-scales, with emphasis on the statistics of daily weather. It uses an Ensemble Kalman Filter data assimilation method with background first guess fields supplied by an ensemble of forecasts from a global numerical weather prediction model. This directly yields a global analysis every 6 hours as the most likely state of the atmosphere, and also an uncertainty estimate of that analysis.

*The 20CR dataset provides the first estimates of global tropospheric variability, and of the dataset's time-varying quality, from 1871 to the present at 6-hourly temporal and 2° spatial resolutions.* Intercomparisons with independent radiosonde data indicate that the reanalyses are generally of high quality. The quality in the extratropical Northern Hemisphere throughout the century is similar to that of current three-day operational NWP forecasts. Intercomparisons over the second half-century of these surface-based reanalyses with other reanalyses that also make use of upper-air and satellite data are equally encouraging.

It is anticipated that the 20CR dataset will be a valuable resource to the climate research community for both model validations and diagnostic studies.* Some surprising results are already evident. For instance, the long-term trends of indices representing the North Atlantic Oscillation, the tropical Pacific Walker Circulation, and the PacificNorth American pattern are weak or non-existent over the full period of record. The long-term trends of zonally averaged precipitation minus evaporation also differ in character from those in climate model simulations of the twentieth century.* Copyright © 2011 Royal Meteorological Society and Crown Copyright.​
The weather's not getting worse, and the models are wrong.


----------



## RollingThunder (Jun 9, 2011)

daveman said:


> The Twentieth Century Reanalysis Project - Compo - 2011 - Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society - Wiley Online Library
> 
> Abstract
> The Twentieth Century Reanalysis (20CR) project is an international effort to produce a comprehensive global atmospheric circulation dataset spanning the twentieth century, assimilating only surface pressure reports and using observed monthly sea-surface temperature and sea-ice distributions as boundary conditions. It is chiefly motivated by a need to provide an observational dataset with quantified uncertainties for validations of climate model simulations of the twentieth century on all time-scales, with emphasis on the statistics of daily weather. It uses an Ensemble Kalman Filter data assimilation method with background first guess fields supplied by an ensemble of forecasts from a global numerical weather prediction model. This directly yields a global analysis every 6 hours as the most likely state of the atmosphere, and also an uncertainty estimate of that analysis.
> ...



The weather is getting worse, the models are proving to be pretty accurate, your quote is pointless and you are getting even more retarded.


----------



## westwall (Jun 9, 2011)

RollingThunder said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > The Twentieth Century Reanalysis Project - Compo - 2011 - Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society - Wiley Online Library
> ...







The historical record says you and your alarmist cohorts are wrong.


----------



## skookerasbil (Jun 10, 2011)

RollingThunder said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > The Twentieth Century Reanalysis Project - Compo - 2011 - Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society - Wiley Online Library
> ...





A post from among the hordes of the perpetually duped..............

s0n........I recently posted up a historical analysis link of all the decades going back to 1850. If a model were present back in 1840 and predicted "the weather is getting worse and the model is proving accurate".......it'd be spot on.

Weather is not a phenomenon that started a few years ago.................

*C'mon!!!!!!*


----------



## skookerasbil (Jun 10, 2011)

By the way Chris...........you prove the liberal mind has some thought processing issues. I and others publically embarass the author of this thread and the response is rote, mindless repeat nonsense that rejects the reality. 

Kinda sounds just like somebody in the public spotlight right now who's getting publically pwned and who's daily response is "Im not resigning!!".

Im telling you people...........liberalism is a fcukking mental disorder.


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Jun 10, 2011)

Chris, what's your hypothesis for this?


----------



## Old Rocks (Jun 10, 2011)

westwall said:


> RollingThunder said:
> 
> 
> > daveman said:
> ...



As usual, real scientists state that Walleyes doesn't know his ass from a hole in the ground.

http://www.countercurrents.org/glikson290511.pdf


----------



## Chris (Jun 10, 2011)

Record Events for Fri Jun 3, 2011 through Thu Jun 9, 2011 

High Temperatures: 1859 
Low Temperatures: 158 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Jun 10, 2011)

What is the hypothesis for what's causing these higher temperatures, too many miles on Al Gore's Cessna?


----------



## skookerasbil (Jun 10, 2011)

How do they matter s0ns???


----------



## Chris (Jun 10, 2011)

Record Events for Fri Jun 3, 2011 through Thu Jun 9, 2011 

High Temperatures: 1895 
Low Temperatures: 160 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## Chris (Jun 10, 2011)

It was so hot in St. Paul that a once-giant snow pile, the remnant of a long, harsh and suddenly vanquished winter, succumbed this week in 103-degree heat. 

So stifling in Indianapolis that a projected high on the cool side of 90 degrees &#8212; even if that meant 89 &#8212; was greeted with thanks worthy of benediction. And so miserable in Philadelphia that a meteorologist summed up the forecast in three words: &#8220;considerably more disgusting&#8221; than the day before. 

A heat wave that has taken hold across much of the Central and Eastern United States intensified Thursday, with cities from St. Louis to Richmond, Va., seeing record or near-record high temperatures, cloying humidity and dangerously elevated ozone levels. 

Officials responded by closing schools early, opening public pools before the start of swimming season and establishing cooling centers in municipal buildings for people without air-conditioning. 

All this, and the start of summer is still nearly two weeks away. 

&#8220;We are seeing conditions that we normally don&#8217;t have until August,&#8221; said Jim Keeney, a meteorologist with the National Weather Service. &#8220;The heat has been pushed north all the way into Wisconsin, and in the North especially, we are seeing temperatures 15 to 20 degrees above normal.&#8221; 

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/10/us/10heat.html


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Jun 11, 2011)

Look at the tree rings...you are getting sleepy...so sleepy...the manmade global warming is making you so tired...sleepy....sleepy


----------



## sparky (Jun 11, 2011)

this is seriously screwing anyone with ards....


----------



## skookerasbil (Jun 11, 2011)

Chris said:


> It was so hot in St. Paul that a once-giant snow pile, the remnant of a long, harsh and suddenly vanquished winter, succumbed this week in 103-degree heat.
> 
> So stifling in Indianapolis that a projected high on the cool side of 90 degrees &#8212; even if that meant 89 &#8212; was greeted with thanks worthy of benediction. And so miserable in Philadelphia that a meteorologist summed up the forecast in three words: &#8220;considerably more disgusting&#8221; than the day before.
> 
> ...










2011........the first year in the history of mankind that we are seeing above normal temperatures!!!


----------



## sparky (Jun 11, 2011)




----------



## skookerasbil (Jun 11, 2011)




----------



## skookerasbil (Jun 11, 2011)

IDK..........Im confused. Living here in New York, I remember heat waves lasting for 10 days. 90+ temps with lots of near 100 degree days. The last few years? Not nearly as much. We were hot around here this week........but for 2 days only!! Its freezing here this am.

In 1896.........a ten day heat wave of temperatures in the mid 90's killed hundreds.
The Heat Wave Of 1896 And The Rise Of Roosevelt : NPR 

Long heat waves never happen for a sustained period anymore. In fact.......by far, the longest heat wave in New York happened generations ago..........in 1953. IDK.........all this tallk about heat by the radical environmentalists in here but the history of heat illustrates a far different picture in New York.

Ahhhhhh...........must just be an anomoly!!!


----------



## skookerasbil (Jun 11, 2011)

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ieQfQUUc74]YouTube - &#x202a;Global Warming Panic Explained&#x202c;&rlm;[/ame]


----------



## skookerasbil (Jun 11, 2011)

This whole thread is a perfect illustration of the manner in which a nerdy geek with social development issues goes about his business. Its classic.......the passive aggressive style that invariably is found in the type that was always picked last for the team in the schoolyard. The social invalid who stood on the sidelines at social events.....with a thumb up the ass. Water high pants FTL.

Whats the common theme over the course of a lifetime for these types? They invariably pwn themselves in public forums ( see Anthony Weiner ). Fcukked up geeky assholes who carve out a little niche for themselves and invariably fcukk it up!!

Yo Chris?

Do I hit the nail on the head or do I hit the nail on the head??!!!


----------



## ScienceRocks (Jun 11, 2011)




----------



## Samson (Jun 11, 2011)

RetiredGySgt said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> > *Dang, where did our cold winter go to?*
> ...



They also don't explain how there are ANY record cold temperatures NOW.

HAMweather Climate Center - Record Low Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## Old Rocks (Jun 11, 2011)

Samson said:


> RetiredGySgt said:
> 
> 
> > Old Rocks said:
> ...



Nobody can explain how some are so dense that they can believe the weather ups and downs will cease with global warming. But then, we always have the Samsons with us.

Since this was the strongest La Nina on record, we should have set cold records all winter. Instead, often there were more warm records that cold, even in the depths of winter.


----------



## Old Rocks (Jun 11, 2011)

Record Events for Sat Jan 15, 2011 
Total Records: 137 
Rainfall: 42 
Snowfall: 26 
High Temperatures: 14 
Low Temperatures: 25 
Lowest Max Temperatures: 3 
Highest Min Temperatures: 27


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Jun 11, 2011)

Old Rocks said:


> Record Events for Sat Jan 15, 2011
> Total Records: 137
> Rainfall: 42
> Snowfall: 26
> ...



Record Low temp?  With Global Warming?

LOL.


----------



## daveman (Jun 11, 2011)

RollingThunder said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > The Twentieth Century Reanalysis Project - Compo - 2011 - Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society - Wiley Online Library
> ...


Wrong on all four counts.  Typical.


----------



## daveman (Jun 11, 2011)

Old Rocks said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > RollingThunder said:
> ...


The Royal Meteorological Society aren't real scientists?


----------



## westwall (Jun 11, 2011)

Old Rocks said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > RollingThunder said:
> ...





"Real scientists" who can't seem to read.  Below are four random years typed into a search engine.  It seems that any ignorant git could do that and amazingly enough every random year had a great storm.  Of course "real" scientists of the alarmist ilk can't read anything beyond the tip of their collective noses that's why they are so good at parroting each other.  Try again loser.

Grote Mandrenke Storm - Timelines.com

The Christmas Snowstorm of 1776

Lytham & St.Annes on the Sea Lancashire, News, Weather, Hotels, Guest Houses, Transport & Local History Resources - 1852 Christmas Storm

Remembering a fierce Great Lakes storm | Minnesota Public Radio News


----------



## Chris (Jun 11, 2011)

Record Events for Sat Jun 4, 2011 through Fri Jun 10, 2011 

High Temperatures: 1701 
Low Temperatures: 83 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## Chris (Jun 11, 2011)

Half the country wilts under unrelenting heat

SPRINGFIELD, Mass. (AP) &#8212; A third day of unseasonable heat blistered the eastern half of the country Thursday, making tornado cleanup miserable in Massachusetts and sending country music fans in Tennessee to hospitals, while the surge in demand for energy knocked out power to sections of downtown Detroit.

Relief was on the way in the Northeast, however, as an approaching cold front triggered evening thunderstorms. Tens of thousands lost power in parts of New England as the storms passed through.

The persistent heat and resulting storms has been blamed for at least eight deaths from the Plains to the East Coast, where authorities prepared emergency rooms and encouraged neighbors to check on the elderly as temperatures soared above 100 in spots.

Detroit officials intentionally cut power to city hall and a convention center Thursday to prevent the municipal power system from crashing from high energy demand &#8212; even though temperatures had tapered to the 70s after two days above 90. Equipment failures knocked out power to several other government buildings and traffic lights in parts of the downtown.

"Because there was a short window of time, we had to make a decision to take some of our customers off to prevent a blackout of the entire city," Detroit mayoral spokeswoman Karen Dumas said.

Some Northeastern schools canceled classes or closed early for a second day Thursday so students would not have to suffer with no air conditioning. Cooling centers opened in Chicago, Memphis, Tenn., Newark, N.J., and other cities as a refuge for those without air conditioning.

In New Jersey, records of 102 degrees were recorded at the Newark and Atlantic City airports, beating their respective previous records of 99 degrees and 98 degrees set in 2008. The temperature also reached 102 degrees at Ronald Reagan National Airport near Washington, matching a record set in 1874. Philadelphia hit 99 degrees, one degree higher than a record set in 1933.

The Associated Press: Half the country wilts under unrelenting heat


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Jun 11, 2011)

Chris said:


> Half the country wilts under unrelenting heat
> 
> SPRINGFIELD, Mass. (AP)  A third day of unseasonable heat blistered the eastern half of the country Thursday, making tornado cleanup miserable in Massachusetts and sending country music fans in Tennessee to hospitals, while the surge in demand for energy knocked out power to sections of downtown Detroit.
> 
> ...



    

But Warmers don't count when the WHOLE country was warmer in he mid 1930's because that was just the lower 48 states.


----------



## ScienceRocks (Jun 11, 2011)

CrusaderFrank said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > Half the country wilts under unrelenting heat
> ...



Well, they the warmers DO say it is global. Different weather patterns like blocking highs and decadal patterns like the PDO, NAO, IND, AMO can cause different set up that sometimes can cause cooler or warmer decades. Meaning the pattern that causes such to occur much more often then otherwise. Look at the whole planet when talking about a global temperature and see if there was some other place that was as COLD as hell during the 1930's.


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Jun 11, 2011)

Chris said:


> Half the country wilts under unrelenting heat
> 
> SPRINGFIELD, Mass. (AP)  A third day of unseasonable heat blistered the eastern half of the country Thursday, making tornado cleanup miserable in Massachusetts and sending country music fans in Tennessee to hospitals, while the surge in demand for energy knocked out power to sections of downtown Detroit.
> 
> ...



Do you have a theory on why this happens?


----------



## ScienceRocks (Jun 11, 2011)




----------



## Chris (Jun 11, 2011)

On Wednesday, temperatures soared into the 90s -- and approached 100 degrees -- throughout much of the South, the East and the Midwest. Baltimore and Washington, D.C. both recorded temperatures of 99 degrees, breaking records for the date. The normal high for the date is about 82, the Associated Press reported.

In Philadelphia the mercury hit 97 degrees, breaking a 2008 record of 95, and Atlantic City, N.J., tied a record of 98 set in 1999. Chicago hit a high of 94 degrees, the AP reported.

The heat wave has been blamed for the deaths of five elderly people in Tennessee, Maryland and Wisconsin, the news service said.

And a new study from Stanford University predicts that scorching temperatures will become the new normal, with unusually hot summers by the middle of the century. The culprit cited by the researchers: global warming, the AP reported.

Record Temperatures Posing Health Risks in U.S. - US News and World Report


----------



## Chris (Jun 12, 2011)

London - This spring is on course to be the hottest since records began 100 years ago. 

And despite the prospect of showers over the next few days, forecasters say there is still no sign of the heavy rain needed to ease near-drought conditions in the South and East of England. 

According to Met Office figures, April was the warmest since records began in 1910, while March was warmer than usual. 

So if temperatures in the second half of this month remain high, the average temperature of the three months will be around 9.2c (48.6f) - the hottest on record. 

England


----------



## Chris (Jun 12, 2011)

Record Events for Sun Jun 5, 2011 through Sat Jun 11, 2011 

High Temperatures: 1594 
Low Temperatures: 71 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## Big Fitz (Jun 12, 2011)

Chris said:


> London - This spring is on course to be the hottest since records began 100 years ago.
> 
> And despite the prospect of showers over the next few days, forecasters say there is still no sign of the heavy rain needed to ease near-drought conditions in the South and East of England.
> 
> ...


Strange.  In the Twin Cities, outside of one record heat spike, it's been below average for 2-3 months now.

Oh well.  London must be right and the Twin Cities must be wrong.

Your 'localized phenomenon equals global trend' thread series are a friggen joke, Cherry Picker.


----------



## boedicca (Jun 12, 2011)

We've had a very cold spring.  Most days below the seasonal average, and well below the record highs.


----------



## daveman (Jun 12, 2011)

boedicca said:


> We've had a very cold spring.  Most days below the seasonal average, and well below the record highs.



Obviously, global warming is the cause; and obviously, global socialism is the only solution.


----------



## Old Rocks (Jun 13, 2011)

Obviously Daveboy is still without a clue.


----------



## Old Rocks (Jun 13, 2011)

Big Fitz said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > London - This spring is on course to be the hottest since records began 100 years ago.
> ...



Record fires in the Southwest of our nation. Record fires in North Canada. Record fires in Siberia and Russia. Drought in all of these places, including almost all of Nothern Europe. In the meantime, the Missouri and Mississippi are in flood stage from Canada to Louisiana.  At the start of the year, about 1/4 of the continent of Australia was flooded. And this year looks like it may be a repeat of last year when Russia lost 40% of their grain harvest to drought.

Yeah, Fritzy, real localized phenomena.


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Jun 13, 2011)

Old Rocks said:


> Big Fitz said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...



Can you tell us your Theory as to what caused these event?


----------



## westwall (Jun 13, 2011)

Old Rocks said:


> Big Fitz said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...







Yep, 50+ years of forest mismanagement are definately the cause of GW induced fires.  What a wonderful example of the warmers lack of scientific acumen.  Correlation does not equal causation....unless you are a warmist of course.


----------



## boedicca (Jun 13, 2011)

Yet another day in Oaklandtown where the highest temp in the forecast is BELOW the seasonal average...and 22 degrees below the record high.


----------



## saveliberty (Jun 13, 2011)

Old Rocks blaming fires on global warming now?  Pretty laughable.  We have had more fires than normal the past two years.  Brush fires.  Lower than normal temperatures here dring that time and a fair amount of rain.  Our problem...

Lack of funding for roadside mowing, so more fuel is available.  Careless burns by property owners.


----------



## Big Fitz (Jun 13, 2011)

saveliberty said:


> Old Rocks blaming fires on global warming now?  Pretty laughable.  We have had more fires than normal the past two years.  Brush fires.  Lower than normal temperatures here dring that time and a fair amount of rain.  Our problem...
> 
> Lack of funding for roadside mowing, so more fuel is available.  Careless burns by property owners.


You were noticing that too?  Failed ecofascist forest management is suddenly no longer the cause of forest fires, but globull wurming is?

What a disingenuous fuck.

BTW, anyone else getting bored with the 'static universe' model the ecofascists keep trying to achieve?


----------



## Big Fitz (Jun 13, 2011)

CrusaderFrank said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> > Big Fitz said:
> ...


I'm sure it'll have something to do with magical manmade CO2.


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Jun 13, 2011)

"Global Warming Causes Forest Fires. Stop laughing...I'm not kidding...really..I'm not just making this up"


----------



## daveman (Jun 13, 2011)

Old Rocks said:


> Obviously Daveboy is still without a clue.



It's really not my fault that you're too stupid to realize that every single "solution" to your cult's fantasy is socialism.


----------



## boedicca (Jun 13, 2011)

Green is the New Red!


----------



## Big Fitz (Jun 13, 2011)

boedicca said:


> Green is the New Red!


They're watermelons.  Green on the outside, Red on the inside.


----------



## daveman (Jun 13, 2011)

boedicca said:


> Green is the New Red!


----------



## Big Fitz (Jun 13, 2011)

daveman said:


> boedicca said:
> 
> 
> > Green is the New Red!


Much easier on the eyes.


----------



## Chris (Jun 14, 2011)

Record Events for Tue Jun 7, 2011 through Mon Jun 13, 2011 

High Temperatures: 1248 
Low Temperatures: 64 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## skookerasbil (Jun 14, 2011)

Chris said:


> Record Events for Tue Jun 7, 2011 through Mon Jun 13, 2011
> 
> High Temperatures: 1248
> Low Temperatures: 64
> ...



























Keep posting up those numbers s0n!!!!


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Jun 14, 2011)

Chris said:


> Record Events for Tue Jun 7, 2011 through Mon Jun 13, 2011
> 
> High Temperatures: 1248
> Low Temperatures: 64
> ...



213 max lows over the same period KhJs (poker joke = King Jack off)

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Jun 14, 2011)

Chris said:


> Record Events for Tue Jun 7, 2011 through Mon Jun 13, 2011
> 
> High Temperatures: 1248
> Low Temperatures: 64
> ...



Its Warmer.

It's Colder.

Clearly, this is the work of the twin forces of GlobalWarmerCoolering and GlobalCoolerWarmering


----------



## boedicca (Jun 14, 2011)

Today our forecast is finally for a reasonably warm day...3 degrees above the seasonal average, and 25 below the record high temp.


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Jun 14, 2011)

boedicca said:


> Today our forecast is finally for a reasonably warm day...3 degrees above the seasonal average, and 25 below the record high temp.



...because of Global Warming


----------



## Chris (Jun 15, 2011)

Record Events for Wed Jun 8, 2011 through Tue Jun 14, 2011 

High Temperatures: 979 
Low Temperatures: 57 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## Big Fitz (Jun 15, 2011)

Chris said:


> Record Events for Wed Jun 8, 2011 through Tue Jun 14, 2011
> 
> High Temperatures: 979
> Low Temperatures: 57
> ...


Huh... what I find interesting is that right in the middle of all the record high temperatures, there's a record low temperature.

So I started playing.  Going back to single day readings, not the more 'awe inspiring' weekly compilations which really, when you look at them day by day, aren't that impressive.  And strangely!  Follow the pattern of weather!  A hot front is moving through, wow!  Record highs!  Cold front?  AMAZING!  Record Lows!  But funny thing is, most of that activity happened on ONE day. 

Here.  Try this people.  Starting on January 1, 2011.  Look at each day of the maps individually with the high temp and low temp checked for a week.   Jan 1st.  By the time the week was out, there were only 2 record high  and 2 record low temps.  But as a single week?  HAH  Looks crazy!  The  point is most of these temps are not SUSTAINED and in totally different  places by the flow of the weather!  

You will quickly see how trumped up this bullshit cherry picked insanity is.  And how little it's worth is to climatology.  I bet it will be even more evident if I can figure out how to animate that.

Whooooooole lotta correlation going on, and not much causation or proof of anything other than you can find anything you want on the web to hyperventilate going on.

yet more evidence Chris is playing smoke and mirrors.


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Jun 15, 2011)

Big Fitz said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > Record Events for Wed Jun 8, 2011 through Tue Jun 14, 2011
> ...



Global Warming means records low temperatures. If you hide the decline and multiply it by Mann's tree rings, it all adds up


----------



## Big Fitz (Jun 15, 2011)

CrusaderFrank said:


> Big Fitz said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...


I swear... one of these days Imma slappa teeth outta yo' mouf you keep messin' wit' me like dat!


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Jun 15, 2011)

Fitz, bad news. My SUV killed the sunspots, it was an accident. I Swear


----------



## westwall (Jun 15, 2011)

CrusaderFrank said:


> Big Fitz said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...







  I owe you rep for that one!


----------



## ScienceRocks (Jun 15, 2011)

Noaa just came out with May's global temperatures and there was a good size drop. .50c or the 10th warmest may. Year is the 12th so far. 

Global Highlights

    The combined global land and ocean average surface temperature for May 2011 was 0.50°C (0.90°F) above the 20th century average of 14.8°C (58.6°F). This is the 10th warmest such value since records began in 1880.


The combined global land and ocean average surface temperature for JanuaryMay 2011 was the 12th warmest on record. The year-to-date period was 0.48°C (0.86°F) warmer than the 20th century average.


----------



## saveliberty (Jun 15, 2011)

My natural gas bill for the latest month is up 25% from last year.  I have a more efficient gas dryer now.  Care to guess where most of the usage is?  Prices aren't that different, just so you know.

Matches up almost exactly to the total degree days comparison from 2010 to 2011 for the month at -28%.


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Jun 15, 2011)

Matthew said:


> Noaa just came out with May's global temperatures and there was a good size drop. .50c or the 10th warmest may. Year is the 12th so far.
> 
> Global Highlights
> 
> ...



...and that's all because of ManMade Global Warming


----------



## Chris (Jun 15, 2011)

Record Events for Wed Jun 8, 2011 through Tue Jun 14, 2011 

High Temperatures: 1013 
Low Temperatures: 64 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## Chris (Jun 15, 2011)

Big Fitz said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > Record Events for Wed Jun 8, 2011 through Tue Jun 14, 2011
> ...



Actually it's proof that the warming is coming from CO2.

CO2 retains heat from sunlight. There is more sunlight in the Northern Hemisphere in June than January, thus more record heat in June.

Thanks for pointing that out.


----------



## daveman (Jun 15, 2011)

Chris said:


> Big Fitz said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...


Utter nonsense.


----------



## saveliberty (Jun 15, 2011)

So CO2 geniuses...

Any guesses whether we are driving more or less with increase gas prices?

With all these increased temps, we using more or less heating products?

Still confused about all those weather stations next to increasing heat sources and black top?

Telling a lie 50,000 times doesn't make it any more true.  Gore the Guru is revealed for the nutcase, money grubbing person he is.   HE doesn't believe this crap, yet you swallow it completely.


----------



## westwall (Jun 15, 2011)

Chris said:


> Big Fitz said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...







If that's true why is almost the entire state of Nevada, a desert state, still running below average temps?  In some cases far below average.  Kinda blows a whole in your religious dogma there.


----------



## ScienceRocks (Jun 15, 2011)

westwall said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > Big Fitz said:
> ...




Negative PDO, which promotes a cooler western United states trough=dip in the jet stream. On the other hand down stream there is a ridge and a heat wave within the eastern part of the US.


----------



## westwall (Jun 16, 2011)

Matthew said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...






Yes, I know that.  However if what Chris is claiming is true the entire northern hemisphere must be warmer and that is clearly not the case.


----------



## Chris (Jun 16, 2011)

westwall said:


> Matthew said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...



Actually it is.

The extraordinary heat wave in Russia last year was a good example.


----------



## Old Rocks (Jun 16, 2011)

Matthew said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...



Now Mathew, don't confuse Walleyes with facts and logic.


----------



## Old Rocks (Jun 16, 2011)

westwall said:


> Matthew said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...



The site the Chris posts clearly shows where both the cold areas and the warm areas are. It just happens that there are a lot more records for heat being set in the warm areas, than records being set in the cold areas. 

Which mean absolutely nothing in a weeks run. Starts to be relevant in a years run. And, in a ten year run, definitely indicates a trend. In a thirty years, it states something is changing. The thirty year run;

UAH Temperature Update for May, 2011: +0.13 deg. C « Roy Spencer, Ph. D.


----------



## Old Rocks (Jun 16, 2011)

westwall said:


> Matthew said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...



Really?

Northern hemisphere warming rates: More than you may have heard


----------



## Big Fitz (Jun 16, 2011)

Chris said:


> Big Fitz said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...


ooOOOOooo Corollary/causation confusion once again, Ladies and Gentlemen!  It's all CO2's fault.  Not water vapor represented in humidity caused by warm air!  Nor the sun beating down causing rapid evaporation!  It's the CO2 that made the air hot and therefore H2O is not really making it hot but representational of the heat!

BUT for the sake of argument, how do you prove that this magical CO2 is man's fault again?  Oh that's right, you can't.  

You only see a natural cycle wherein any increase is blamed on man because it's all about creating a world wide ecofascist state.

Chris: Wow!  Look an Egg!
Ole Crocks: Yes, but what came first, the chicken or the egg?
Chris: Good question!

The sane members of the audience who are watching:  Guys, it is irrelevant, for that is chicken shit.


----------



## Big Fitz (Jun 16, 2011)

Matthew said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...


So once again, weather (which when it disagrees with Chicken Little dogma) is not to be looked at as proof of it's debunking.  But when it SUPPORTS Chicken Little Dogma, It's CLIMATE!

Double Standard is Double Stupid.


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Jun 16, 2011)

Big Fitz said:


> Matthew said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...



Take Mann's tree rings, multiply by the sine of the decrease in sunspots (pick a time period, any time period), then square that number, then take the last three numbers of the attendance of the last Boston Red Sox/NY Yankees game and that's how much ManMade Global Warning has increased temperatures at Maccu Piccu.


----------



## westwall (Jun 16, 2011)

Chris said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > Matthew said:
> ...






NOAA disagree's with you.



Whereas an event of this magnitude was unexpected for the summer of 2010, and indeed there was little if any advance warming from long lead seasonal forecasts, it is nonetheless important to assess the factors that may have been responsible for such an extreme heat wave. There is strong evidence that the immediate cause can be placed at the doorstep of an extreme pattern of atmospheric windswidely referred to as blocking. In the situation of anticyclonic blocking such as developed over western Russia in early July 2010, the normal west-to-east movement of weather systems is inhibited, with the center of a blocking experiencing persistently quiescent weather.


Blocks are not an uncommon occurrence over Eurasia in summer, with a episodes of July blocking in the region between 0-60ºE evident during the past half century (Figure 5). This region is vulnerable to episodes of blocking owing to physical factors related to the region's location downstream of the Atlantic westerly jet.

The sector exhibits high climatological frequency of blocking days during July/August, with an average of 10 days experiencing a blocking conditions (Figure 6). During July/August of 2010 (thru 11 August) this region experienced roughly triple its normal blocking days. The duration of this blocking event was long, and the intensity of the high pressure anomaly itself was unusually strong. The intensity of the positive 500mb height anomalies averaged over the geographic region of eastern Europe and western Russia during July/August 2010 exceeded any prior occurrence of anticyclonic blocking (Figure 7).

The strength of the height anomaly at 500mb during July/August 2010 was 4 times the standard deviation of July heightsa departure amplitude similar to that in the region's July surface temperatures. Typically, there is little persistence of the circulation pattern from July to August, although the current block that formed in early July continued with great strength through the middle of August.

The extreme surface warmth over western Russia during July and early August is mostly a product of the strong and persistent blocking high. Surface temperatures soared as a result of the combination of clear skies, sinking motion within the environment of the high pressure causing compressional heating of air, the lack of any temporary relief owing to the blocking of the typical cold fronts that cool the region intermittently in summer. Add to this scenario the cumulative effect of drought that began in early summer which caused soils to dry and plants to desiccate to wilting point , thereby causing additional surface warming via land feedbacks as the blocking condition persisted. These are all well-known and studied physical processes that have accompanied summertime blocking and heat waves in the past.



2010 Russian Heat Wave


----------



## Big Fitz (Jun 16, 2011)

CrusaderFrank said:


> Big Fitz said:
> 
> 
> > Matthew said:
> ...


I warned ya...






...Not to mess with me!


----------



## ScienceRocks (Jun 16, 2011)

This is the last 1,200 years of temperature data.


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Jun 16, 2011)

Archived-Articles: Understanding Climategate's Hidden Decline

Proxies, Tricks, and Hockey Sticks

The first step was taken in the 1995 Second Assessment Report, when the above Figure 7c was replaced with a 1993 reconstruction from R.S. Bradley and Phil Jones himself that used 1400 AD as its base -- effectively wiping the MWP off the radar screen.

But it wasn&#8217;t until the 2001 Third Assessment Report (TAR) that the MWP simply vanished. This multi-proxy reconstruction of Northern Hemisphere temperature anomalies appeared in chapter 2, page 134 of the Working Group 1 (WG1) report [PDF].  






"...one must say clearly that we redistribute de facto the world's wealth by climate policy." --IPCC


----------



## Chris (Jun 16, 2011)

Record Events for Thu Jun 9, 2011 through Wed Jun 15, 2011 

High Temperatures: 751 
Low Temperatures: 65 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## theal3 (Jun 17, 2011)

Weather in Oregon this year is not normal. Climate Change.  It's happening.


----------



## Big Fitz (Jun 17, 2011)

Chris said:


> Record Events for Thu Jun 9, 2011 through Wed Jun 15, 2011
> 
> High Temperatures: 751
> Low Temperatures: 65
> ...


"But if I keep posting these irrelevant numbers, then it will can has make it moar truthie."

Got your tiger repellent rock handy?


----------



## Chris (Jun 18, 2011)

Spring 2011 may well go down in the weather history books as the most extreme on record. From the massive April tornado swarm, to record Mississippi river levels, to extreme drought and wildfires in the Southwest, weather extremes were both violent and relentless, taking a terrible toll on human life and the economy.

On Tuesday, Wunderground meteorologist Jeff Masters posted the U.S. had its most extreme spring on record for precipitation: 46% of the country had abnormally wet or dry conditions. He also showed the graph (above) indicating the percent area of the U.S. experiencing much above average one-day precipitation events was 16 percent, a new record (average is 9%). 

Spring extreme weather events in 2011 in U.S.: historic and record setting - Capital Weather Gang - The Washington Post


----------



## Chris (Jun 18, 2011)

Record Events for Sat Jun 11, 2011 through Fri Jun 17, 2011 

High Temperatures: 679 
Low Temperatures: 76 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## ScienceRocks (Jun 18, 2011)

http://www.usmessageboard.com/environment/171764-giss-drops-for-may.html

Cold compared to most of the last decade.


----------



## editec (Jun 18, 2011)

Weather across this continent certainly has been taking some weird twists, hasn't it?


----------



## RetiredGySgt (Jun 18, 2011)

editec said:


> Weather across this continent certainly has been taking some weird twists, hasn't it?



When ever we point out cooling trends Chris reminds us that the US is not the world. Yet he can cite US stats and claim it proves HIS claims. Go figure.


----------



## Old Rocks (Jun 18, 2011)

RetiredGySgt said:


> editec said:
> 
> 
> > Weather across this continent certainly has been taking some weird twists, hasn't it?
> ...



Well, we have had some unusuall weather here in the US in the last few months. And, over the course of the last year, as has China, Pakistan, Russia, Australia, and Canada. In fact, many unusual events on almost every inhabited continent. The trend is global, and the events happened both during a mild El Nino, and a very strong La Nina. Interesting times, folks.


----------



## percysunshine (Jun 18, 2011)

It is all Obamas fault.


----------



## Big Fitz (Jun 18, 2011)

Chris said:


> Record Events for Sat Jun 11, 2011 through Fri Jun 17, 2011
> 
> High Temperatures: 679
> Low Temperatures: 76
> ...


Putting the dense in "Coincidense" since May 2008.

That should be your sigline.


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Jun 18, 2011)

Record highs?  in Summer in the US?  

Fuck!

How does that happen?


----------



## boedicca (Jun 18, 2011)

Today in Oaklandtown:  2 degrees below the historical average, and 18 degrees below the records high.

Another cool day.


----------



## skookerasbil (Jun 18, 2011)

Old Rocks said:


> RetiredGySgt said:
> 
> 
> > editec said:
> ...








These sure are interesting times.............

The "real scientists" padding the data.............

Changing Tides: Research Center Under Fire for 'Adjusted' Sea-Level Data - FoxNews.com


----------



## skookerasbil (Jun 18, 2011)

Oh......and by the way........yesterday was a double whammy of reeeeeeeeeeal bad news for the k00ks..............

*How Miserable? Index Says the Worst in 28 Years *

News Headlines

Put the left in charge of things and they are 100% certain of fcukking it up!!!


----------



## ScienceRocks (Jun 18, 2011)

The floods and tornadoe events are pretty interesting this year. Add in the fires you have a major cluster fuck going on. hehehe. We will see how this hurricane season turns out to be...Doubt another 2005 or even something as active as 1887, 1933, 1969, 1995, 2010 for that matter. Of course track is everything in 2004 with less was a good season and 1999 with 12 had the most cat4's floyd, bret, lanny, Gert, ect. 1995 sucked as 2010, but had 19 storms a piece. At least 1995 had opal ramming into florida as a weaken cat3. hehehe.


----------



## ScienceRocks (Jun 18, 2011)

Being that most of the United states west of the Mississippi has records going back less then 120 years. It is not very hard to break a record. PDX goes back just to 1941 or 70 years. That means records can happen a lot when there is 365 days per year to set a new one in. On the other hand if your talking about new york or london fucking England that goes back to the 1750's??? A record is more respectable.


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Jun 18, 2011)

Matthew said:


> Being that most of the United states west of the Mississippi has records going back less then 120 years. It is not very hard to break a record. PDX goes back just to 1941 or 70 years. That means records can happen a lot when there is 365 days per year to set a new one in. On the other hand if your talking about new york or london fucking England that goes back to the 1750's??? A record is more respectable.



NY actually had record snowfalls for both December and January.


----------



## ScienceRocks (Jun 18, 2011)

CrusaderFrank said:


> Matthew said:
> 
> 
> > Being that most of the United states west of the Mississippi has records going back less then 120 years. It is not very hard to break a record. PDX goes back just to 1941 or 70 years. That means records can happen a lot when there is 365 days per year to set a new one in. On the other hand if your talking about new york or london fucking England that goes back to the 1750's??? A record is more respectable.
> ...



Very true. I think 2010 was also a very snowy year and I forget what other year of the 2000's where it was near record cold, but it was also a very cold and snowy year and had the second president day nor'easter. The northeast been getting slammed harder then heck the past 10 years.


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Jun 18, 2011)

Matthew said:


> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> > Matthew said:
> ...



...because of ManMade Global Warming.


----------



## RetiredGySgt (Jun 18, 2011)

Love the argument that storms are more intense because they cause more damage. Of course the fact more people with more business and pricey homes in the area has nothing what so ever to do with it.

Kinda like how the sun had nothing to do with the warming trend but because it was weaker the last 10 years did have something to do with the fact temps haven't continued to go up.


----------



## Chris (Jun 18, 2011)

RetiredGySgt said:


> Love the argument that storms are more intense because they cause more damage. Of course the fact more people with more business and pricey homes in the area has nothing what so ever to do with it.
> 
> Kinda like how the sun had nothing to do with the warming trend but because it was weaker the last 10 years did have something to do with the fact temps haven't continued to go up.



I like the fact that you don't do any reading.

Climatologists always factor the sun's activity into global warming calculations.


----------



## Chris (Jun 18, 2011)

Record Events for Sat Jun 11, 2011 through Fri Jun 17, 2011 

High Temperatures: 731 
Low Temperatures: 87

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## Old Rocks (Jun 18, 2011)

You can always tell a numbnuts ignoramous when the first thing that they state is that climatologists don't factor in water vapor, or the TSI. In 1896, Svante Arrnhenius did the first real quantative analysis of global warming caused by GHGs, and factored in water vapor. As has been done every since.


----------



## Old Rocks (Jun 18, 2011)

Matthew said:


> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> > Matthew said:
> ...



Weather swings that are wider and wilder, with an overall warming.


----------



## Old Rocks (Jun 18, 2011)

Of course, if the Northeast was two degrees warmer than normal, and had heavy snow, the deniers here would be claiming a 'extreme cold' spell.


----------



## Big Fitz (Jun 18, 2011)

Chris said:


> Spring 2011 may well go down in the weather history books as the most extreme on record. From the massive April tornado swarm, to record Mississippi river levels, to extreme drought and wildfires in the Southwest, weather extremes were both violent and relentless, taking a terrible toll on human life and the economy.
> 
> On Tuesday, Wunderground meteorologist Jeff Masters posted the U.S. had its most extreme spring on record for precipitation: 46% of the country had abnormally wet or dry conditions. He also showed the graph (above) indicating the percent area of the U.S. experiencing much above average one-day precipitation events was 16 percent, a new record (average is 9%).
> 
> Spring extreme weather events in 2011 in U.S.: historic and record setting - Capital Weather Gang - The Washington Post


Horsecrap.  I remember the upper mid-west floods of 1993.  History didn't start when you were born dumbass.

I also remember the extreme winters of 1995 and 96 when I suffered through so many sub zero days I never felt the like before or since, but know full well I may experience again.


----------



## RetiredGySgt (Jun 18, 2011)

And yet on this very board you retards have argued repeatedly that the sun had nothing to do with the SLIGHT warming that has occurred in the last 40 years.

When it is pointed out Mars has warmed you pooh pooh the idea the sun had anything to do with it. Until it is convenient you have denied the sun had any effect at all on the temperatures. But since no warming has occurred in the last 12 years suddenly you are all over the idea that the sun caused the loss of warming. Go figure.


----------



## rdean (Jun 18, 2011)

skookerasbil said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> > RetiredGySgt said:
> ...



From your article:  "We&#8217;ve seen only 7 inches of sea level rise in the past century

7" world wide?  Do you know how much water that is?  Remember, we are in a closed loop system.  There has been no introduction of new sources of water.  That means 7" times the entire surface of every ocean, river and lake on the surface of the earth.  That's "ENORMOUS".  There is only one place that much water could come from.  "Ice".


----------



## Big Fitz (Jun 18, 2011)

retiredgysgt said:


> and yet on this very board you retards have argued repeatedly that the sun had nothing to do with the slight warming that has occurred in the last 40 years.
> 
> When it is pointed out mars has warmed you pooh pooh the idea the sun had anything to do with it. Until it is convenient you have denied the sun had any effect at all on the temperatures. But since no warming has occurred in the last 12 years suddenly you are all over the idea that the sun caused the loss of warming. Go figure.


nnnnooooooooooooooooooooooo  our agenda!!!!!!!

Why won't reality cooperate!!!!!!!!

Whhaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!!!!


----------



## ScienceRocks (Jun 18, 2011)

Big Fitz said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > Spring 2011 may well go down in the weather history books as the most extreme on record. From the massive April tornado swarm, to record Mississippi river levels, to extreme drought and wildfires in the Southwest, weather extremes were both violent and relentless, taking a terrible toll on human life and the economy.
> ...



Wasn't 1993 a 500 year flood and wasn't 2011 yet another one within 18 years? Right??? Also 1890's had huge snowstorms throughout the united states...With the 1890's having years within Portland oregon having upwards of 20 times the snow fall as we normally get today. Look at new york avg and that was close to the truth for at least one of those years. The truth is "if" the temperature is below 32f and you get moisture it is going to fall as snow, but if the temperature warms from lets say a avg of 30f to 36f within 30 years your snowfall is going to go down. As you can see snow falls often within the foot hills as low as 500-1,000 feet about a dozen times a winter, but anymore we're lucky to have a couple of those events make it to the surface. A climate change means a lot here. 

Some of the reports from the 1860's during the dalton shown arctic outbreaks that would make 1990, 1950 look like a fucking joke. I mean highs in the single digits for weeks on end. Pretty much the climate of a different part of the country. 

Lets say January's avg in 1860 was 34, 1890 was 36f, 1950 38f, 1990 44f, 2011 45-46f. A avg of 34 is going to produce a lot of chances for snow and 36f is only going to make more of it rain, but 45f for the coldest week of January on avg? You will be lucky and only with a good set up to get snow anymore. The northeast is far colder temperatures on avg and you can warm it up a few degree's to get more moisture for snow. Maybe it does increase the possibility for a big ass snow event? Yes there is huge events in history, but lets say they start occurring twice for every period other wise 100 years ago they would only happen once within.


----------



## Big Fitz (Jun 18, 2011)

Some of the coldest harshest winters in recorded history, particularly in the Sierra Nevadas were recorded during the building of the trans-continental railroad in the 1860's


----------



## Old Rocks (Jun 19, 2011)

RetiredGySgt said:


> And yet on this very board you retards have argued repeatedly that the sun had nothing to do with the SLIGHT warming that has occurred in the last 40 years.
> 
> When it is pointed out Mars has warmed you pooh pooh the idea the sun had anything to do with it. Until it is convenient you have denied the sun had any effect at all on the temperatures. But since no warming has occurred in the last 12 years suddenly you are all over the idea that the sun caused the loss of warming. Go figure.



RHR, first, we have good measurements of the TSI for the last 40 years. And it has gone down, not up. Now had you stated for the first 40 years of the twentieth century, you might have had a case.

As far as Mars goes, it undergoes orbitual variations, same as Earth. Were the sun increasing it's TSI, then all the planets would be warming. At least one is cooling.

Quite on the contrary, there has been significant warming in the last 12 years, as anyone looking at this graph can tell;

UAH Temperature Update for May, 2011: +0.13 deg. C « Roy Spencer, Ph. D.


----------



## Old Rocks (Jun 19, 2011)

The Columbia River froze hard enough to drive on several times in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. When I was a small child, my father was driving truck from John Day, Oregon to Seneca, Oregon, and the unofficial temperature there was -60. When Seneca had an official temperature recording station, in the '30s, it recorded a -53. This last winter, I think the lowest that it recorded was -31, and that only briefly. 

Portland, Oregon-- long-term cold and snow records and ice storms and silver thaws

This winter, we had one week of cold weather, and the rest of the time, by prior standards, it has just been cool and wet.


----------



## Chris (Jun 19, 2011)

Record Events for Sun Jun 12, 2011 through Sat Jun 18, 2011 

High Temperatures: 808 
Low Temperatures: 73 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## Big Fitz (Jun 19, 2011)

It would be more relevant to see the ages of the records broken.  But that is like straightening deckchairs on the deck of the Titanic while sinking.  Time consuming and worthless on something that's going down anyway.


----------



## Chris (Jun 20, 2011)

Record Events for Mon Jun 13, 2011 through Sun Jun 19, 2011 

High Temperatures: 874 
Low Temperatures: 63 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## skookerasbil (Jun 20, 2011)

The k00ks wouldnt even be aware of the real science that is taking place in the real world. Thats because they spend every day on the radical environmental websites that give you global warming hysteria 24/7/365.

Meanwhile.....in the real world............

*VANISHING SUNSPOTS PRELUDE TO GLOBAL COOLING?  *
Sunspots have all but vanished, and activity is suspiciously quiet. The last time this happened was 400 years ago -- and it signaled a solar event known as a "Maunder Minimum,"  along with the start of what we now call the "Little Ice Age. 

Science Solar Activity Diminishes; Researchers Predict Another Ice Age
Michael Asher (Blog) - February 9, 2008 11:53


Sunspots have all but vanished in recent years.

Henrik Svensmark explains the SKY experiment  Global Cooling comes back in a big way

 Dr. Kenneth Tapping is worried about the sun. Solar activity comes in regular cycles, but the latest one is refusing to start. Sunspots have all but vanished, and activity is suspiciously quiet. The last time this happened was 400 years ago -- and it signaled a solar event known as a "Maunder Minimum,"  along with the start of what we now call the "Little Ice Age."Tapping, a solar researcher and project director for Canada's National Research Council, says it may be happening again. Overseeing a giant radio telescope he calls a "stethoscope for the sun," Tapping says, if the pattern doesn't change quickly, the earth is in for some very chilly weather.

 During the Little Ice Age, global temperatures dropped sharply. New York Harbor froze hard enough to allow people to walk from Manhattan to Staten Island, and in Britain, people reported sighting Eskimos paddling canoes off the coast. Glaciers in Norway grew up to 100 meters a year, destroying farms and villages. 

But will it happen again?In 2005, Russian astronomer Khabibullo Abdusamatov predicted the sun would soon peak, triggering a rapid decline in world temperatures.  Only last month, the view was echoed by Dr. Oleg Sorokhtin, a fellow of the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences. who advised the world to "stock up on fur coats." Sorokhtin, who calls man's contribution to climate change "a drop in the bucket," predicts the solar minimum to occur by the year 2040, with icy weather lasting till 2100 or beyond.

VANISHING SUNSPOTS PRELUDE TO GLOBAL COOLING?





nobody knows..........bottom line.


----------



## boedicca (Jun 20, 2011)

We're finally having a Warm Day, but it's still 5 degrees below the record temp.


----------



## Big Fitz (Jun 20, 2011)

boedicca said:


> We're finally having a Warm Day, but it's still 5 degrees below the record temp.


and that is why you will all DIIEEEE!!!!!!!  CO2 is coming to kill you all!  RARRR RARRR RARRR!!!! KILLKILLKILL!


----------



## skookerasbil (Jun 20, 2011)




----------



## skookerasbil (Jun 20, 2011)

I love this board............what a fcukking hoot.


----------



## Chris (Jun 21, 2011)

Record Events for Tue Jun 14, 2011 through Mon Jun 20, 2011 

High Temperatures: 903 
Low Temperatures: 77 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Jun 21, 2011)

Old Rocks said:


> Matthew said:
> 
> 
> > CrusaderFrank said:
> ...



Record snowfall = Global Warming.

Gotcha


----------



## Samson (Jun 21, 2011)

CrusaderFrank said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> > Matthew said:
> ...



Today is the first day of Summer.

Let's celebrate by agreeing with The Retarded that we expect warmer temperatures for the next three months.


----------



## Chris (Jun 22, 2011)

Samson said:


> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> > Old Rocks said:
> ...



Global warming = more humidity = more snowfall.

Nothing "retarded" about it.


----------



## Chris (Jun 22, 2011)

Record Events for Wed Jun 15, 2011 through Tue Jun 21, 2011 

High Temperatures: 840 
Low Temperatures: 79 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## Big Fitz (Jun 22, 2011)

Chris said:


> Samson said:
> 
> 
> > CrusaderFrank said:
> ...


but without the ability for the air to get cold enough, how's it going to snow?


----------



## Chris (Jun 22, 2011)

Big Fitz said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > Samson said:
> ...



AGW may increase global temperatures by 1 degree in the last century, but it still gets cold in the winter.


----------



## Big Fitz (Jun 22, 2011)

Chris said:


> Big Fitz said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...


Sooooooo... no real change in the weather then.  Good to know you can be honest when not paying attention to what you're saying.

Love the 'may' you included.


----------



## westwall (Jun 22, 2011)

Chris said:


> Big Fitz said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...







Yes, but the residence time of water vapor is only 9 days.   By the time it gets cold all the extra water vapor will have disappeared.   A conundrum for you isn't it.


----------



## Chris (Jun 23, 2011)

Record Events for Thu Jun 16, 2011 through Wed Jun 22, 2011 

High Temperatures: 789 
Low Temperatures: 80 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## westwall (Jun 23, 2011)

Yawnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn!


----------



## westwall (Jun 23, 2011)

Yawwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn!


----------



## westwall (Jun 23, 2011)




----------



## daveman (Jun 23, 2011)

I see Chris is still pointing at weather and calling it climate.


----------



## Old Rocks (Jun 24, 2011)

A very long trend in the weather equals climate. Remember the record La Nina we just experianced? Shouldn't we still be getting cold weather?


----------



## Old Rocks (Jun 24, 2011)

westwall said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > Big Fitz said:
> ...



Kind of a stupid ass, are you, Walleyes. You think that with the modern weather maps all over the weather news now, that people don't see the relitively warm air coming up from the Gulf and colliding with the cold air from the north, creating record snowfalls for the last couple of winters? And then there is the little matter of the wet cool moisture that blows in from the West Coast and cools over the Sierras, and Rockies. 

You deniers surely do present a dumb image to the general public.


----------



## westwall (Jun 24, 2011)

Old Rocks said:


> A very long trend in the weather equals climate. Remember the record La Nina we just experianced? Shouldn't we still be getting cold weather?







The warmists definition of long trend is two weeks


----------



## westwall (Jun 24, 2011)

Old Rocks said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...







What was that little one?  I see the western US not enjoying Spring until the first day of summer....again.  The same thing happened last year as well.  I see snow storms in Colorado the first day of summer.  Something the warmyalarmysmarmy types said wouldn't even happen in winter anymore.  I see arctic sea ice rebounding.  I see glaciers advancing all over the planet.  

You see a computer screen with a bunch of squiggly lines and try to tell us that what is actually happening can't and won't.  Who's the denier?  Oh yeah, it's you and yours.


----------



## daveman (Jun 24, 2011)

Old Rocks said:


> A very long trend in the weather equals climate. Remember the record La Nina we just experianced? Shouldn't we still be getting cold weather?



You guys used to say a trend had to be a decade or more.

Now you're down to days.


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Jun 24, 2011)

daveman said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> > A very long trend in the weather equals climate. Remember the record La Nina we just experianced? Shouldn't we still be getting cold weather?
> ...



I have peer reviewed this post and find it 100% accurate


----------



## daveman (Jun 24, 2011)

CrusaderFrank said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Old Rocks said:
> ...


The science is settled, then.  The debate is over.


----------



## skookerasbil (Jun 24, 2011)

51% Blame Extreme Weather on Long-Term Planetary Trends, 19% Blame Human Activity

Friday, May 13, 2011

U.S. meteorologists say the deadly storms tearing up the South are not a result of climate change.  None the less, the extreme weather has rekindled the global warming debate in Washington, D.C. 

But a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 51% of American Adults think the recent severe weather is primarily caused by long-term planetary trends.  Only 19% blame the extreme weather on human activity which many climate change activists view as the cause of global warming. Twelve percent (12%) say there's some other cause for the bad weather, and 19% more are not sure.  (To see survey question wording, click here.) 

51% Blame Extreme Weather on Long-Term Planetary Trends, 19% Blame Human Activity - Rasmussen Reports





Keep posting up those temperature readings s0ns...........we're all sure it having an enormous impact on public opinion!!!


Go..........go............go..............


----------



## Chris (Jun 27, 2011)

Record Events for Mon Jun 20, 2011 through Sun Jun 26, 2011 

High Temperatures: 361 
Low Temperatures: 79 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## Big Fitz (Jun 28, 2011)

Chris said:


> Record Events for Mon Jun 20, 2011 through Sun Jun 26, 2011
> 
> High Temperatures: 361
> Low Temperatures: 79
> ...


----------



## Chris (Jun 29, 2011)

Record Events for Wed Jun 22, 2011 through Tue Jun 28, 2011 

High Temperatures: 289 
Low Temperatures: 81 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## skookerasbil (Jun 29, 2011)

Old Rocks said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...


----------



## saveliberty (Jun 30, 2011)

Spends all his time with air temperatures and ignores ocean currents.


----------



## Big Fitz (Jun 30, 2011)

saveliberty said:


> Spends all his time with air temperatures and ignores ocean currents.


and atmospheric composition concentrations.


----------



## Chris (Jun 30, 2011)

Record Events for Thu Jun 23, 2011 through Wed Jun 29, 2011 

High Temperatures: 291 
Low Temperatures: 85 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## Big Fitz (Jun 30, 2011)

Chris said:


> Record Events for Thu Jun 23, 2011 through Wed Jun 29, 2011
> 
> High Temperatures: 291
> Low Temperatures: 85
> ...


The stock ticker of irrelevant information chatters on.


----------



## waltky (Jul 1, 2011)

Severe Weather Ravaging US Could Worsen...

*Experts warn epic weather ravaging US could worsen*
_Wed, Jun 29, 2011 - Epic floods, massive wildfires, drought and the deadliest tornado season in 60 years are ravaging the United States, with scientists warning that climate change will bring even more extreme weather._


> The human and economic toll over just the past few months has been staggering: hundreds of people have died, and thousands of homes and millions of acres have been lost at a cost estimated at more than $20 billion.  And the United States has not even entered peak hurricane season.  "This spring was one of the most extreme springs that we've seen in the last century since we've had good records," said Deke Arndt, chief of climate monitoring for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).
> 
> While it's not possible to tie a specific weather event or pattern to climate change, Arndt said this spring's extreme weather is in line with what is forecast for the future.  "In general, but not everywhere, it is expected that the wetter places will get wetter and the drier places will tend to see more prolonged dry periods," he told AFP.  "We are seeing an increase in the amount (of rain and snow) that comes at once, and the ramifications are that it's a lot more water to deal with at a time, so you see things like flooding."
> 
> ...


----------



## westwall (Jul 1, 2011)

waltky said:


> Severe Weather Ravaging US Could Worsen...
> 
> *Experts warn epic weather ravaging US could worsen*
> _Wed, Jun 29, 2011 - Epic floods, massive wildfires, drought and the deadliest tornado season in 60 years are ravaging the United States, with scientists warning that climate change will bring even more extreme weather._
> ...







Yes imagine that the worst storms in 60 years....the important factoid is of course the fact that there was worse weather in the past.  I am amazed that people can read drivel like this and think it important or newsworthy.


----------



## IanC (Jul 2, 2011)

Chris said:


> Record Events for Thu Jun 23, 2011 through Wed Jun 29, 2011
> 
> High Temperatures: 291
> Low Temperatures: 85
> ...



everytime I see on of your posts it makes me wonder about how 'statistics' get twisted around to support a certain point of view. here is a graph generated with apparently govt issued data-





and that is only going back to 1950. I have seen the same type of graph that goes back to 1900 and it shows the majority of records being set in the _first_ half of last century. 

so who should we believe? hamweather or NOAA? lol


----------



## IanC (Jul 2, 2011)

while looking around for the 20th century USA record highs, I made this graph using the NOAA site-





you can plot your own graphs, just visit this site. NCDC:


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 2, 2011)

IanC said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > Record Events for Thu Jun 23, 2011 through Wed Jun 29, 2011
> ...


----------



## IanC (Jul 2, 2011)

and of course the last decade of 'accelerating' temperature increases, lol


----------



## westwall (Jul 2, 2011)

IanC said:


> and of course the last decade of 'accelerating' temperature increases, lol







Yep.  The "scientists" (or as olfraud refers to them "real scientists") keep telling us we are breaking all of these heat records, yet we have record snow everywhere and we're still 15 degrees below average.  And there is a chance of snow up here on the Fourth!  A small chance but a chance.


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 2, 2011)

IanC said:


> and of course the last decade of 'accelerating' temperature increases, lol


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 2, 2011)

westwall said:


> IanC said:
> 
> 
> > and of course the last decade of 'accelerating' temperature increases, lol
> ...




Hey West.........out here in New York, the high this July 4th weekend is going to be about 87 or 88. We've had two.........count 'em........TWO over 90 degree days this year. Nobody's been going to the ocean because the water is freezing cold!!!

Is this a "break" in the warming the k00ks are always talking about??


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 2, 2011)

El Nino seen as playing major role in increase seen in 2010 temperatures.........

From ScienceDaily.com...............

2010 one of two warmest years on record; El Niño-Southern Oscillation and other climate patterns play major role


More bad news for the k00ks................


----------



## Salt Jones (Jul 2, 2011)

It's 11:11am and already 108 degrees here in Phoenix. It's supposed to be between 116 and 119. I love it.


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 2, 2011)

Salt Jones said:


> It's 11:11am and already 108 degrees here in Phoenix. It's supposed to be between 116 and 119. I love it.




fcukking ice age FTW!!!!


Cool bro..........enjoy it!!!


----------



## Moonglow (Jul 2, 2011)

Here in SW Missouri it's not the 100 degree heat that bothers me, it the 70 degree dew point and high humidity. Like being inna sauna all day. Takes care of water retention though


----------



## Mr. H. (Jul 2, 2011)

It hit 93 in Illinoisy today. If it were 93 degrees on July 2, 1960 - we never gave it a second thought. What's the deal all of a sudden? We used to complain about the weather just to make idle conversation. Now we make a federal case over it?


----------



## Chris (Jul 2, 2011)

Record Events for Sat Jun 25, 2011 through Fri Jul 1, 2011 

High Temperatures: 328 
Low Temperatures: 95 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## Chris (Jul 2, 2011)

A huge dome of steamy hot high pressure - responsible for more than 600 high temperature records since Saturday - shifts toward the East Coast starting tomorrow, Wednesday.

Over the weekend, this sultry airmass brought historically hot temperatures to Houston, Texas which reached 105 degrees Sunday, its warmest June day in history. The Houston Chronicle reported new record highs were set there in five of the first six days in June. The Sunday records in both Houston and Galveston shattered old records by seven degrees. 

The heat expanded north and east Monday. The Chicago Tribune reported highs reached at least 90 degrees in 28 states, with records set in 20 states. Locations that set new record highs include Gary, Indiana (93), Lincoln Park, Illinois (96), Fort Dodge, Iowa (104), Milwaukee, Wisconsin (94), Minneapolis, Minnesota (98) and New Orleans, Louisiana (95).

An excessive heat warnings is in effect for Minneapolis today, where highs in the upper 90s are expected. In Chicago, high are forecast to be in the mid-90s, potentially the hottest in nearly five years.

Massive, record-setting heat ridge headed East - Capital Weather Gang - The Washington Post


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Jul 2, 2011)

Chris said:


> A huge dome of steamy hot high pressure - responsible for more than 600 high temperature records since Saturday - shifts toward the East Coast starting tomorrow, Wednesday.
> 
> Over the weekend, this sultry airmass brought historically hot temperatures to Houston, Texas which reached 105 degrees Sunday, its warmest June day in history. The Houston Chronicle reported new record highs were set there in five of the first six days in June. The Sunday records in both Houston and Galveston shattered old records by seven degrees.
> 
> ...



Global Warming causes high pressure?

Yeah?


----------



## Mr. H. (Jul 2, 2011)

Chris said:


> A huge dome of steamy hot high pressure - responsible for more than 600 high temperature records since Saturday - shifts toward the East Coast starting tomorrow, Wednesday.
> 
> Over the weekend, this sultry airmass brought historically hot temperatures to Houston, Texas which reached 105 degrees Sunday, its warmest June day in history. The Houston Chronicle reported new record highs were set there in five of the first six days in June. The Sunday records in both Houston and Galveston shattered old records by seven degrees.
> 
> ...



Here's a hot steamy dome for ya:


----------



## westwall (Jul 2, 2011)

Chris said:


> A huge dome of steamy hot high pressure - responsible for more than 600 high temperature records since Saturday - shifts toward the East Coast starting tomorrow, Wednesday.
> 
> Over the weekend, this sultry airmass brought historically hot temperatures to Houston, Texas which reached 105 degrees Sunday, its warmest June day in history. The Houston Chronicle reported new record highs were set there in five of the first six days in June. The Sunday records in both Houston and Galveston shattered old records by seven degrees.
> 
> ...







Go figure, it's summer.


----------



## westwall (Jul 2, 2011)

CrusaderFrank said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > A huge dome of steamy hot high pressure - responsible for more than 600 high temperature records since Saturday - shifts toward the East Coast starting tomorrow, Wednesday.
> ...






It's that new mathweatherclimatechangerthing.  Yeah that's it.


----------



## Chris (Jul 3, 2011)

Record Events for Sun Jun 26, 2011 through Sat Jul 2, 2011 

High Temperatures: 300 
Low Temperatures: 81 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## Chris (Jul 3, 2011)

Tokyo is facing the threat of renewed power cuts as a heatwave pushes electricity demand close to the limits of generating capacity, three months after the loss of multiple reactors in the Fukushima nuclear plant.

Temperatures in the Japanese capital soared to 35 degrees centigrade on Wednesday, and some surrounding districts reported their hottest June day on record. Air conditioner use pushed electricity consumption to its highest level since the March 11 tsunami, at 93 per cent of capacity.

Tokyo reaches boiling point on hottest June day - FT.com


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Jul 3, 2011)

Chris said:


> Record Events for Sun Jun 26, 2011 through Sat Jul 2, 2011
> 
> High Temperatures: 300
> Low Temperatures: 81
> ...



81 record lows...Global Warming to blame


----------



## westwall (Jul 3, 2011)

Chris said:


> Please respect FT.com's ts&cs and copyright policy which allow you to: share links; copy content for personal use; & redistribute limited extracts. Email ftsales.support@ft.com to buy additional rights or use this link to reference the article - Tokyo reaches boiling point on hottest June day - FT.com
> 
> 
> Tokyo is facing the threat of renewed power cuts as a heatwave pushes electricity demand close to the limits of generating capacity, three months after the loss of multiple reactors in the Fukushima nuclear plant.
> ...





When it gets to the equal of the 1930's you can wake me up.

Posted at 11:00 AM ET, 06/21/2010 
The heat waves of the 1930s 
By Kevin Ambrose 
* Hot week just getting started: Full Forecast | NatCast *


A Washington, D.C. heat wave cartoon from July 28, 1930. The heat wave is pictured trying to break a "sitting record," imitating the popular flagpole sitters of the day. The summer of 1930 set the record in Washington for number of days that temperatures reached or exceeded 100°F, at 11 days. The hottest temperature of 106°F occurred on July 20. Pulitzer Prize winner Clifford Berryman drew the cartoon. Source: The book "Washington Weather."

Before there was global warming, there were the dust bowl years of the 1930s, also known as "The Dirty Thirties." The record-setting heat waves and drought of the 1930s occurred during the middle of the Great Depression and contributed to the economic hardship felt throughout the nation. They also occurred when most people did not have the comfort of air conditioning and many heat-related deaths were reported. Two years during that decade were particularly hot for our region, 1930 and 1936. Those two years set heat records in Washington which still stand today.

Keep reading to learn more about the heat waves of 1930 and 1936.

The summer of 1930 made headlines due to unprecedented heat and drought that caused disastrous crop failures throughout the United States. The summer of 1930 ushered in the "Dust Bowl" era of unusually hot, dry summers that plagued the U.S. during much of the 1930s.

Washington area farmers were certainly not spared in 1930, as intense, prolonged hot spells gripped the region during late July and early August. The official temperature recorded on July 20 was 106°F, which holds the record as the highest temperature ever recorded in Washington. Unofficially, 110°F was recorded that same day on Pennsylvania Avenue and 108°F at the National Cathedral. The summer of 1930 also set the record for number of days where temperatures reached or exceeded 100°F at 11 days. 

High temperatures of over 100°F were recorded during two heat waves that occurred in late July and early August of 1930. The July heat wave high temperatures are as follows:

July 19 - 102°F
July 20 - 106°F
July 21 - 103°F
July 22 - 100°F
July 23 - 94°F
July 24 - 93°F
July 25 - 100°F
July 26 - 100°F

The August heat wave high temperatures are as follows:

August 2 - 94°F
August 3 - 100°F
August 4 - 102°F
August 5 - 102°F
August 6 - 88°F
August 7 - 97°F
August 8 - 104°F
August 9 - 102°F

By the end of the summer of 1930, approximately 30 deaths in Washington were blamed on the heat and thousands more had died nationwide. In Washington, there has never been another summer with a heat wave that has equaled the summer of 1930.


The Heat Chaser hostess gives a Washington policeman a cold drink, August 4, 1936. Temperatures reached 95°F that day. The hottest day of that summer was July 10 when the temperature reached 105°F.Source: The book "Washington Weather."

The summer of 1936 stands out as one of the hottest summers felt across the entire United States. The heat wave began in early summer, with the Midwest experiencing June temperatures exceeding 100°F in some locations. The heat peaked in July, with all-time records set in many cities. Steele, North Dakota recorded a high temperature of 121°F and portions of Canada saw high temperatures exceed 110°F. In Washington, the temperature reached 104°F on July 9 and 105°F on July 10. More than 5,000 heat-related deaths were reported across the United States. The heat wave and drought of 1936 finally eased in September.

For you snow-lovers, how do you think the winters that followed the heat waves of 1930 and 1936 fared for Washingtonians? I can sum it up in one word, depressing. Of course, if you like tennis weather or afternoon strolls without an overcoat, the winters of 1930/31 and 1936/37 were awesome. 

During the winter that followed the 1930 heat wave, there were only 3 days which had temperatures below freezing all day and only 2.5" of snow fell during the entire winter season. Temperatures in the 40's and 50's were common during the winter months, with 67°F recorded on January 27. 

The winter that followed the heat wave of 1936 was even milder than 1930 for Washington. During that winter, there was only 1 day which had temperatures below freezing all day and temperatures in the 60's were common throughout the winter months. An amazing high temperature of 76°F was recorded on January 9. A few late season wet snowstorms salvaged the winter for snow in Washington, with a little over 15" reported for the season. 


By Kevin Ambrose  | June 21, 2010; 11:00 AM ET 
Categories:  Photography 





Capital Weather Gang - The heat waves of the 1930s


----------



## Chris (Jul 3, 2011)

The warmest May on record was nearly followed by the hottest June, until a cold snap this week finally started the winter chill. 

Until Tuesday, June temperatures were 1.8C warmer than usual throughout New Zealand, a temperature shared with June 2003. 

June one of hottest ever - despite cold nights - Environment - NZ Herald News


----------



## westwall (Jul 3, 2011)

Chris said:


> The warmest May on record was nearly followed by the hottest June, until a cold snap this week finally started the winter chill.
> 
> Until Tuesday, June temperatures were 1.8C warmer than usual throughout New Zealand, a temperature shared with June 2003.
> 
> June one of hottest ever - despite cold nights - Environment - NZ Herald News







Like anyone is going to believe a word this guy says.  He was sacked after losing the court case referenced here where he was "adjusting the data" to conform to his and the rest of the alarmists claims.  He's quite the "real scientist".  


NIWA challenged over accuracy of weather data

Many scientists believe the Earth has not heated as much as claimed (file)

Mon, 16 Aug 2010 8:55a.m.

Court action against New Zealand's state-owned weather and atmospheric research body is "stupid" and just creating confusion, University of Otago pro-vice chancellor of sciences Keith Hunter says. 

The National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research (Niwa) is being taken to court in a challenge over the accuracy of its data used to calculate global warming. 

The New Zealand Climate Science Coalition said it had lodged papers with the High Court asking the court to invalidate Niwa's official temperature records. 

The lobby of climate sceptics and the ACT Party have long criticised Niwa over its temperature data, which Niwa says is mainstream science and not controversial, and the raw data publicly available. 

Coalition spokesman Bryan Leyland said many scientists believed although the earth had been warming for 150 years, it had not heated as much as claimed. 

He said the New Zealand Meteorological Service had shown no warming during the past century but Niwa had adjusted its records to show a warming trend of 1degC. The warming figure was high and almost 50 percent above the global average, said Mr Leyland. 

The coalition said the 1degC warming during the 20th century was based on adjustments taken by Niwa from a 1981 student thesis by then student Jim Salinger, a Niwa employee who was later sacked after talking to the news media without permission. 

But Prof Hunter told Radio New Zealand the courts could not determine whether or not the adjusted records had been adjusted properly. 

"It can only be done by people who have an established scientific reputation in meteorology. So if the coalition has got those people they should do the analysis. If they haven't they should find someone else who has got that. 

"There is nothing sinister about making adjustments. Measurements are often adjusted because of procedural differences between stations or changes in instruments with time. 

"The coalition are just creating confusion. Throwing mud and if they throw enough mud some will stick and organisations like Niwa get dragged down in it," Prof Hunter said. 

Meanwhile, the Environmental Defence Society (EDS) said in a statement that it may join court action in support of Niwa. 

EDS chairman Gary Taylor said the society was evaluating whether there was merit in joining the proceedings. 

"On the face of it, it's hard to see how the issue can properly be brought before the court. We have no doubts that the science behind global warming predictions is robust and reliable and would wish to support the institute in any way that we can. 

"It is one thing to have a robust debate about the science and quite another to attempt to belittle and undermine the need for action, as the coalition has been doing now for years," Mr Taylor said. 

The coalition will ask the court to find Niwa's New Zealand temperature record (NZTR) invalid. 

It would also seek a court declaration preventing Niwa from using the NZTR when it advised the Government or any other body on global climate issues. It would also ask the court to order Niwa to produce a full and accurate NZTR. 

A substantive hearing was expected this year. 




NIWA challenged over accuracy of weather data - Story - Environment/Sci - 3 News


----------



## Chris (Jul 3, 2011)

Just now the Fourth of July, and it's already been a long, hot summer.

With 45 consecutive days of 90-plus-degree heat, Savannah broke a record Sunday.

Before Sunday, temperatures had topped 90 for the longest stretch - 44 days - in 1993. 

The National Weather Service has been tracking temperatures in Savannah since 1874. That 1993 record was set in late July and early August, typically the hottest time of the year in Savannah. What makes the new record even more remarkable, NWS meteorologist John Quagliariello said, is that it was set so early in the summer.

Savannah breaks heat record | savannahnow.com


----------



## daveman (Jul 4, 2011)

Record cold weather recorded in southern Brazil | World News - Russian opinion

Record low June temperature at Thermal CA &#8211; 5 June 2011 | Climate and Weather of the West

Temps set record low few weeks after high | The Austin Daily Herald

A landspout and record cold - Grand Rapids Weather | Examiner.com

That proves it.  Global cooling is real.


----------



## Chris (Jul 4, 2011)

Record Events for Mon Jun 27, 2011 through Sun Jul 3, 2011 

High Temperatures: 328 
Low Temperatures: 74 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## Chris (Jul 4, 2011)

daveman said:


> Record cold weather recorded in southern Brazil | World News - Russian opinion
> 
> Record low June temperature at Thermal CA  5 June 2011 | Climate and Weather of the West
> 
> ...



Thanks for bringing up Austin. You're the best!

Central Texas could see a high of 100 degrees today in whats shaping up to be a record June month for heat, said Bob Rose, meteorologist for the Lower Colorado River Authority.

The region just missed the triple-digit mark yesterday, with Camp Mabry posting a high of 99 and Austin-Bergstrom International Airport at 98, according to the National Weather Service.

Lingering moisture in the ground from last weeks rains helped contribute to the slightly lower temperatures, Rose said. Also, the center of yesterdays high was over Northeast Texas, not Austin, as it has been in recent days, Rose said.

The slight decline in temperatures shouldnt stay long, Rose warns. Hes expecting triple-digit heat today and into the July 4 weekend.

The additional heat this week could make this one of the hottest Junes on record. The hottest June, based on an average overall temperature of 87.4, was set in 2008. For now, were looking at the second hottest June with an average June temperature of 87.1, he said.

Austin news, sports, weather, Longhorns, business | Statesman.com


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 4, 2011)

Chris said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Record cold weather recorded in southern Brazil | World News - Russian opinion
> ...





fAiL s0n......................

Two of the last three years have been the coolest Junes in New York City on record. And this June..........we froze our asses off most of the month with the tempertautures barely making 80 degree's.

In New York, Its the Summer That Isnt - NYTimes.com

I guess global warming has decided to bypass New York and aim at Texas!!

The k00ks always want to post up the data THEY want people to see........so they fall all over themselves to find area's in the country where its currently hot as shit. How gay?









c'mon Chris........stop being such a hysterical limpwristed asshole!!! Loser stays up nights looking for temperature data that fits his agenda!!


----------



## daveman (Jul 4, 2011)

Remember, folks, if the weather's hot, it's proof of global warming.  If the weather's cold, it's proof of global warming.  If the weather's normal, it's proof of global warming.

The pretty much cover it, Chris?


----------



## Big Fitz (Jul 4, 2011)

daveman said:


> Remember, folks, if the weather's hot, it's proof of global warming.  If the weather's cold, it's proof of global warming.  If the weather's normal, it's proof of global warming.
> 
> The pretty much cover it, Chris?


First, define normal.


----------



## Big Fitz (Jul 4, 2011)

Chris said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Record cold weather recorded in southern Brazil | World News - Russian opinion
> ...


You're tall and live with raftered low ceilings, don't you?


----------



## ScienceRocks (Jul 4, 2011)

Big Fitz said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Remember, folks, if the weather's hot, it's proof of global warming.  If the weather's cold, it's proof of global warming.  If the weather's normal, it's proof of global warming.
> ...



On the Giss/Noaa graph I believe they consider "normal" to be 0c, which in 1880 we where near -.2c below that line and today.  They consider the mid evil warm period near .3 to .4c, while today near .5 to .6c. They based this normal based on the interglacial period that has been going on for the past 10,000 years.


----------



## Big Fitz (Jul 4, 2011)

Matthew said:


> Big Fitz said:
> 
> 
> > daveman said:
> ...


First engage your rhetoricalometer, then your sarcas-o-meter.


----------



## daveman (Jul 4, 2011)

Big Fitz said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Remember, folks, if the weather's hot, it's proof of global warming.  If the weather's cold, it's proof of global warming.  If the weather's normal, it's proof of global warming.
> ...


I'll leave that to the AGW cultists, who insist there must be one.


----------



## daveman (Jul 4, 2011)

Snowbird caps longest season with holiday skiing | Deseret News

Damn that global cooling!


----------



## percysunshine (Jul 4, 2011)

daveman said:


> Snowbird caps longest season with holiday skiing | Deseret News
> 
> Damn that global cooling!



There are still 9 ski resorts open in the US:

Open Ski Resorts - North America


On the 4th of July....chuckle


----------



## daveman (Jul 4, 2011)

percysunshine said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Snowbird caps longest season with holiday skiing | Deseret News
> ...


  Watch out for the glaciers!


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 5, 2011)

Hey Dave.........check this out bro.............

Skiing on the Fourth of July!!!!! How cool is that?

Snowbird caps longest season with holiday skiing | Deseret News


----------



## daveman (Jul 5, 2011)

skookerasbil said:


> Hey Dave.........check this out bro.............
> 
> Skiing on the Fourth of July!!!!! How cool is that?
> 
> Snowbird caps longest season with holiday skiing | Deseret News



Ummm...dood...


----------



## Big Fitz (Jul 5, 2011)

daveman said:


> Snowbird caps longest season with holiday skiing | Deseret News
> 
> Damn that global cooling!


Yeah, I heard that.  Yoot Aww must be very happy with the results of Glowbull Warnin' if they keep getting ski seasons like this.


----------



## Chris (Jul 5, 2011)

Record Events for Tue Jun 28, 2011 through Mon Jul 4, 2011 

High Temperatures: 353 
Low Temperatures: 80 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## daveman (Jul 5, 2011)

Big Fitz said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Snowbird caps longest season with holiday skiing | Deseret News
> ...



Isn't it handy when you can claim that every single weather phenomenon is created by your pet cause?


----------



## Big Fitz (Jul 6, 2011)

daveman said:


> Big Fitz said:
> 
> 
> > daveman said:
> ...


Three cheers for the religion of weather!  Now let's begin our 'greet the morning ceremony' with the chant of obedience...

It is all man's fault
It is all man's fault

It is all man's fault
It is all man's fault

It is all man's fault
It is all man's fault

Good!

Now, we must commit our morning sacrifice of a denier to keep the sun from going out and CO2 at bay lest we be destroyed in a burny-freezy-rain-ball-of-hail-snow-drought-flood.


----------



## ScienceRocks (Jul 6, 2011)

rss
 2011  6    *0.277 * 

5th warmest junes


2010, 1998, 2002, 1991, 2011

June 2010 still was under the Atmosphere of a fairly strong nino, 1998 WAS under the effects of the most powerful nino in history, 2002 the same. 1991 if I remember right was to. First neutral June to get into the top 5.

Warm SST anomalies <=1°C subsequently began to appear in the central and eastern Pacific in mid-1991. However, the ENSO really began to take shape in September 1991, when an abrupt SST increase (e.g., 2°C at 0°, 140°W) interrupted the normal seasonal evolution of the equatorial cold tongue (Fig. 2b). This sharp rise in SST was associated with a westerly wind burst of several weeks duration west of the dateline in August- September (Fig. 2a). A second pronounced episode of westerly winds penetrated eastward to 170°W during November and December 1991, followed by a third westerly wind event that reached all the way to 140°W for a few days in January 1992. SST anomalies east of the date line grew in response to the amplification and eastward extension of these westerly wind anomalies, peaking at >2°C near 155°W in the first quarter of 1992. By March, 28°C SSTs, values usually confined to west of 170°W along the equator, appeared as far east as 110°W (Fig. 3a). Conversely, under the influence of intense local westerly wind forcing, SST decreased to near-normal temperatures in the western Pacific (Figs. 2b and 4b). The lowest monthly values of the SOI during the event (-3.4 and -3.0) were reached in January and March 1992 (Climate Analysis Center, 1993).


----------



## westwall (Jul 6, 2011)

Matthew said:


> rss
> 2011  6    *0.277 *
> 
> 5th warmest junes
> ...






I wonder how they calculated that this was one of the warmest Junes ever.  The amount of snow still on the ground belies their assertions.


----------



## Big Fitz (Jul 6, 2011)

westwall said:


> Matthew said:
> 
> 
> > rss
> ...


Their religion brooks no opposition.  Even from reality itself.


----------



## Chris (Jul 6, 2011)

Record Events for Wed Jun 29, 2011 through Tue Jul 5, 2011 

High Temperatures: 376 
Low Temperatures: 72

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## Chris (Jul 6, 2011)

Big Fitz said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Big Fitz said:
> ...



The sun is at its lowest level of activity in 80 years.


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Jul 6, 2011)

Chris said:


> Record Events for Wed Jun 29, 2011 through Tue Jul 5, 2011
> 
> High Temperatures: 376
> Low Temperatures: 72
> ...



Old Crocks told us the Continental US does not count as Global, Dear. Try to keep up with the rest of the class.


----------



## daveman (Jul 6, 2011)

Big Fitz said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Big Fitz said:
> ...


Man, I _hate_ it when that happens.


----------



## saveliberty (Jul 6, 2011)

Chris said:


> Big Fitz said:
> 
> 
> > daveman said:
> ...



Climate runs in cycles.  I for one am glad it may be getting warmer, because glaciers in my back yard would really suck.


----------



## Big Fitz (Jul 6, 2011)

Chris said:


> Big Fitz said:
> 
> 
> > daveman said:
> ...


  Nooooooo.... Really?!?

What the fuck tipped you off Sherlock?  The cold long winter, short spring and generally cool summer so far despite your screams of doom and gloom from the imaginary 'hottest year on record'?

What you apparently tripped over is a clue.


----------



## Big Fitz (Jul 6, 2011)

daveman said:


> Big Fitz said:
> 
> 
> > daveman said:
> ...


yeah.  hump day is rough.


----------



## Chris (Jul 6, 2011)

Phoenix sets record heat for day at 118 degrees

PHOENIX (AP) &#8212; About 4,000 homes in the metropolitan Phoenix area are without power &#8212; and air-conditioning &#8212; on a record-shattering day of heat in one of the nation's hottest cities.

Phoenix hit a high temperature of 118 degrees on Saturday, topping a 10-year-old record of 116 degrees for the date.

The National Weather Service say clouds from monsoon activity likely kept the area from reaching 120 degrees, but they say it's still the city's hottest day so far this year.

The Associated Press: Phoenix sets record heat for day at 118 degrees


----------



## Chris (Jul 6, 2011)

Big Fitz said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > Big Fitz said:
> ...



I was the one who first posted that info here over a year ago.

And there is nothing imaginary about it.

Just ask the Russians about last summer.


----------



## Chris (Jul 6, 2011)

ABILENE, Texas -- After the hottest spring ever in Abilene, there was no relief in June with the second hottest on record.

The extreme heat that you might be complaining about is pretty unusual. We actually hit record temps five times just in the month of June.

Trying to stay cool has been a difficult task in West Central Texas over the past few months. Especially this June when we reached the century mark 19 times.

So it probably isn't much of a shock that the average temp was nearly eight degrees above normal. High temperatures topped out at a sizzling 107 not once, but three consecutive days.

Second Hottest June in Abilene - Abilene News Story - KTXS Abilene


----------



## daveman (Jul 7, 2011)

Chris said:


> Phoenix sets record heat for day at 118 degrees
> 
> PHOENIX (AP)  About 4,000 homes in the metropolitan Phoenix area are without power  and air-conditioning  on a record-shattering day of heat in one of the nation's hottest cities.
> 
> ...





Chris said:


> ABILENE, Texas -- After the hottest spring ever in Abilene, there was no relief in June with the second hottest on record.
> 
> The extreme heat that you might be complaining about is pretty unusual. We actually hit record temps five times just in the month of June.
> 
> ...


That's called "weather".  And if we can't point to snow storms as refutation of global warming, you can't point to hot weather as proof of global warming.

But then, logic and consistency is not the AGW cult's strong suit.  So you'll keep doing it anyway.


----------



## IanC (Jul 7, 2011)

CrusaderFrank said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > Record Events for Wed Jun 29, 2011 through Tue Jul 5, 2011
> ...



funny!


----------



## luluyan (Jul 7, 2011)

Record Events for Wed Jun 30, 2011 through Thu Jul 7, 2011 

High Temperatures: 418
Low Temperatures: 36


----------



## Chris (Jul 7, 2011)

ABILENE, Texas -- After the hottest spring ever in Abilene, there was no relief in June with the second hottest on record.

The extreme heat that you might be complaining about is pretty unusual. We actually hit record temps five times just in the month of June.

Trying to stay cool has been a difficult task in West Central Texas over the past few months. Especially this June when we reached the century mark 19 times.

So it probably isn't much of a shock that the average temp was nearly eight degrees above normal. High temperatures topped out at a sizzling 107 not once, but three consecutive days.

Second Hottest June in Abilene - Abilene News Story - KTXS Abilene


----------



## Chris (Jul 7, 2011)

Northeastern Oklahoma just experienced the second hottest June in the last 100 years as temperatures were constantly above 90 degrees.

So far this summer, Green Country has experienced an excessive amount of heat and July - usually the hottest month of the year - has only just begun.

According to reports from EMSA, weathermen across the state of Oklahoma are predicting temperatures consistently hitting between 105-110 degrees on a daily basis.

"We expect this to be one of the worst summers we have seen in quite some time," said Kelli Bruer, EMSA director of public relations.

Excessive heat smothers Green Country - BALedger.com: News


----------



## Big Fitz (Jul 7, 2011)

Chris said:


> Big Fitz said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...


Okay, so you're the original moron.  Now that has been established are you now going to try and break your own bullshit by saying one isolated hot summer in one part of the world suddenly makes global climate?  I thought this kind of stuff was 'weather'... not 'climate'.

How much horsepower you got under them goalposts there?  They move like a dragster.


----------



## Chris (Jul 7, 2011)




----------



## ScienceRocks (Jul 7, 2011)

Chris said:


>



Keep up the good work Chris...I greatly enjoy looking at weather and climate records.


In my opinion 2010 could of beat 2007, but the weather pattern turned against it in mid july onwards. 2007 had a great melting pattern in August-Sept, but I truly believe with a decent melting pattern we will beat it. Doesn't even have to be as good as 2007 either for this year to be number one.


----------



## Chris (Jul 8, 2011)

OKLAHOMA CITY &#8212; The searing heat has set temperature records in Oklahoma City and Tulsa.

The National Weather Service says the mercury peaked at 108 degrees in Oklahoma City on Thursday, breaking a record set in 1996 of 106 degrees.

Up the turnpike in Tulsa, a record high temperature of 104 degrees was set on Thursday.

High temperature records set in Oklahoma City and Tulsa as heat wave continues :: The Republic


----------



## Chris (Jul 9, 2011)

Record Events for Sat Jul 2, 2011 through Fri Jul 8, 2011 

High Temperatures: 381 
Low Temperatures: 41 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## Big Fitz (Jul 9, 2011)

You know.  John Nash, Nobel Prize winning Economist and creator of Game Theory saw patterns where there were none too.

He was diagnosed with severe schizophrenia, and after treatment was much better for it.


----------



## Chris (Jul 9, 2011)

Big Fitz said:


> You know.  John Nash, Nobel Prize winning Economist and creator of Game Theory saw patterns where there were none too.
> 
> He was diagnosed with severe schizophrenia, and after treatment was much better for it.



Changing the subject and personal insults are the usual response when you have no facts.

When the facts are on your side, argue the facts.

When the law is on your side, argue the law.

When you have neither, bang on the table.

Keep banging on the table, my friend.


----------



## Big Fitz (Jul 9, 2011)

Chris said:


> Big Fitz said:
> 
> 
> > You know.  John Nash, Nobel Prize winning Economist and creator of Game Theory saw patterns where there were none too.
> ...


Dude, you've been given more facts by people much more tolerant than me and smarter than you.  

When you refuse to acknowledge the fact your argument is intellectually bankrupt and based on religious zealotry and all solutions point to global fascism; not to mention that every hiccup of the weather in any direction is always man's fault...   You know, I just don't feel it's a proper use of my time to entertain the farce that you're an intelligent, let alone sentient being.  I'm starting to consider you need a turing test, and we'll probably find out you're some AI on a Daily Kos server somewhere.

We have argued the facts and you lost.

We have argued he ethics and you are in need of some.

We are now mocking you openly, and it is entertaining.


----------



## daveman (Jul 10, 2011)

Chris said:


> Big Fitz said:
> 
> 
> > You know.  John Nash, Nobel Prize winning Economist and creator of Game Theory saw patterns where there were none too.
> ...



The fact is, weather is not climate.  Even if you think it supports AGW.


----------



## Chris (Jul 10, 2011)

daveman said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > Big Fitz said:
> ...



Temperatures are rising, the poles are melting, in spite of the fact that the sun is at its lowest level of activity in 80 years.

Why?


----------



## Big Fitz (Jul 10, 2011)

Chris said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...


If...  IF... your theory is true (which too many have showed the 'science' is far from settled or true on this), there is STILL nothing mankind can do about it save adapt.

There is no way possible for us to save ourselves from a cosmological event such as climatological changes.  The fact then you are worried about something we cannot affect, and try to instill a global ecofascist government for YOUR personal satisfaction and the pain of all mankind speaks to the fact you don't give a ratfuck about the issue at hand, but are nothing more than a greedy self-centered control freak that needs to be kept as far from power and influence as an insane asylum allows.


----------



## daveman (Jul 10, 2011)

Chris said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...


Because you're exhaling CO2, you selfish bastard.  If you loved the planet, you'd stop.


----------



## Big Fitz (Jul 10, 2011)

daveman said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > daveman said:
> ...


ohpleaseohpleaseohplease!


----------



## Chris (Jul 11, 2011)

(CNN) -- A heat wave is building and could reach dangerous levels in parts of the Midwest, the Plains and the Southeast this week.

Fifteen states are under heat advisories, which means temperatures are expected to exceed 105 degrees Fahrenheit.

Kansas City and St. Louis in Missouri are under an excessive heat warning, along with Tulsa, Oklahoma; Memphis, Tennessee; and Evansville, Indiana. In these areas, the heat index, or how hot the body feels due to the combined effects of heat and humidity, will reach between 110 and 115 degrees this week.

The advisories and warnings will remain in effect until at least Tuesday.

Several high-temperature records have been broken recently.

Wichita, Kansas, hit 111 degrees Sunday. The National Weather Service says temperatures of 111 degrees have only occurred there 10 times since July 1888.

Also on Sunday, the temperature in tornado-ravaged Joplin, Missouri, hit 106 degrees, and in Springfield, Missouri, it topped 102 degrees. Both of these temperatures bested high-temperature records set in the 1980s.

Oklahoma City hit a record high of 108 degrees Thursday, the same day that Tulsa hit a record high of 104 degrees.

Record temperatures seen as heat wave plagues 15 states - CNN.com


----------



## Chris (Jul 11, 2011)

Record Events for Mon Jul 4, 2011 through Sun Jul 10, 2011 

High Temperatures: 333 
Low Temperatures: 75 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## daveman (Jul 11, 2011)

Chris said:


> Record Events for Mon Jul 4, 2011 through Sun Jul 10, 2011
> 
> High Temperatures: 333
> Low Temperatures: 75
> ...


That's weather.  Dismissed.


----------



## daveman (Jul 11, 2011)

That's weather.  Dismissed.


----------



## Mr. H. (Jul 11, 2011)

In 5 months we'll be bitching about the cold... again. Ah well makes for idle conversation.


----------



## Baruch Menachem (Jul 11, 2011)

Read your own gosh darn link.

Record heat hit five cities, not 15 states.

It gets hot in the midwest in the summertime.


----------



## Si modo (Jul 11, 2011)

Hot in July...who'da thunkit.


----------



## masquerade (Jul 11, 2011)

> Excessive heat is extremely hazardous to human health. According to information on the National Weather Service website, heat disorders can develop when the body heats too quickly to cool itself safely, or when a person loses too much fluid or salt by sweating or dehydration.
> 
> Signs of heat exhaustion include heavy sweating, pale and clammy skin, weak pulse, fainting and vomiting.
> 
> ...



I've never experienced record heat before so this information comes in handy.  ( sarcasm )


----------



## Big Fitz (Jul 11, 2011)

daveman said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > Record Events for Mon Jul 4, 2011 through Sun Jul 10, 2011
> ...


Tell me, Dave, what do you do with a soldier who won't 'dismiss' when he long ought to have?


----------



## daveman (Jul 11, 2011)

Big Fitz said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...


No experience with Soldiers, but I expect it's the similar to the Air Force:

Verbal counselling for failure to follow orders, and if it continues:

1.  Written counselling.

2.  Letter of reprimand.

3.  Article 15, Non-Judicial Punishment for violation of Article 92, Failure to follow orders. 

4.  Court-martial for violation of Article 92, Failure to follow orders.


----------



## Big Fitz (Jul 11, 2011)

daveman said:


> Big Fitz said:
> 
> 
> > daveman said:
> ...


Well call the MPs this moron's not dismissing.


----------



## Squrl (Jul 11, 2011)

any updates?


----------



## Chris (Jul 11, 2011)

daveman said:


> That's weather.  Dismissed.



Temperatures are rising, the poles are melting, in spite of the fact that the sun is at its lowest level of activity in 80 years.

Why?


----------



## Chris (Jul 11, 2011)

Baruch Menachem said:


> Read your own gosh darn link.
> 
> Record heat hit five cities, not 15 states.
> 
> It gets hot in the midwest in the summertime.



The states under the heat advisory are:

-- Nebraska

-- Kansas

-- Oklahoma

-- Texas

-- Iowa

-- Missouri

-- Arkansas

-- Louisiana

-- Illinois

-- Indiana

-- Ohio

-- Kentucky

-- Tennessee

-- Alabama

-- Mississippi

Record temperatures seen as heat wave plagues 15 states - CNN.com


----------



## daveman (Jul 11, 2011)

Big Fitz said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Big Fitz said:
> ...


----------



## Chris (Jul 11, 2011)

TYLER,TX (KLTV) - For much of East Texas June was the hottest June on record and July is starting off much the same way. If the forecast high temperatures are reached today across East Texas it will make the 14th straight day that Tyler as hit or surpassed 100°F. This is the second longest stretch of 100°F plus days on record. The longest was in 1980 when the temperature hit 100°F or more for 16 days. Today would be the 12th straight day of 100°F heat in Longview, the longest stretch on record. So why has it been so hot?

When will the heat end? - KLTV 7 News Tyler, Longview, Jacksonville |


----------



## daveman (Jul 11, 2011)

Chris said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > That's weather.  Dismissed.
> ...



I told you.


----------



## Big Fitz (Jul 11, 2011)

Chris said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > That's weather.  Dismissed.
> ...


Poles melting, temps are rising and the sun's decline isn't cooling us.

Mont. ultra-marathon race cancelled due to snow | KULR-8 News, Sports, Weather | - Billings, Montana Local Coupons | Montana State News

You're a fucking lunatic of selective weather support.



> Brad Lamson tells the Missoulian that portions of the course for the  Swan Crest 100 have deep snow that is concealing signs that mark trail  intersections.


----------



## Chris (Jul 11, 2011)

Big Fitz said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > daveman said:
> ...




Hardly selective. I have been posting the overview for months...

Record Events for Mon Jul 4, 2011 through Sun Jul 10, 2011 

High Temperatures: 333 
Low Temperatures: 75 

Nice try, though. Enjoy the heat!


----------



## Big Fitz (Jul 11, 2011)

Chris said:


> Big Fitz said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...


yes your devotion to the irrelevant has been impressive to say the least.  Stupid to be more accurate.


----------



## ScienceRocks (Jul 11, 2011)

Who ever that thinks that this can't cause a negative influence on our global temperature is not thinking.


----------



## Chris (Jul 11, 2011)

Big Fitz said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > Big Fitz said:
> ...



Ignore the facts and insult the person posting them.

The typical response.


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Jul 11, 2011)

Its hot in Texas...in the Summer!!!!

Stop the presses!!!


----------



## waltky (Jul 11, 2011)

Heat index here is 114°...

*US Heat Wave Claims First Victim*
_July 11, 2011 - Fifteen states under dangerous heat through half of the week_


> Dangerous heatwave building for parts of the Midwest, plains, and Southeastern USA this week.  Over 15 states are under advisories. Those advisories means temperatures over 105 degrees F is expected.  Deaths have already been blamed for the heat. a 51-year old man from Illinois died Sunday due to the heat. His AC was not working in his mobile home where they found him.
> 
> The advisories and warnings will drop sometime after Tuesday.  Heat disorders can develop when the body heats too quickly to cool itself safely, or when a person loses too much fluid or salt by sweating or dehydration.  Signs of heat exhaustion include heavy sweating, pale and clammy skin, weak pulse, fainting and vomiting.
> 
> ...


----------



## westwall (Jul 11, 2011)

Chris said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > That's weather.  Dismissed.
> ...







Because Earth processes take a lot longer then you can imagine.   A hundred years to you is a mere billionth of a second in Earth reckoning.  It takes a long time for things to occur on the planet.  It's not magic..as much as you would like to claim it as such.


----------



## ScienceRocks (Jul 11, 2011)

satellite estimates based on channel 5 temperature.

Brown 2010
Purple 2011


----------



## gslack (Jul 12, 2011)

Chris still posting numbers and colorful pics I see.. LOL Hallowed is the Goracle...


----------



## Chris (Jul 12, 2011)

The National Weather Service issued a heat advisory for parts of 24 states and the District of Columbia, with parts of 10 Midwestern and Southern states getting a more extreme excessive heat warning as well.

The areas covered by the excessive heat advisory -- parts of Oklahoma, Kansas, Missouri, Arkansas, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Tennessee, Mississippi and Alabama -- can expect the heat index to rise above 110 degrees Tuesday, the Weather Service said.

The hottest of the hot looks to be Mississippi and parts of Tennessee, where forecasters warned the heat index could soar to 116.

Other states included in the heat advisory are Connecticut, Delaware, Kansas, Louisiana, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Texas and Virginia.

Dangerous heat wave spreads - CNN.com


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Jul 12, 2011)

It's summer, it's hot, in Texas.

Details to follow but somehow its mankinds fault


----------



## Big Fitz (Jul 12, 2011)

gslack said:


> Chris still posting numbers and colorful pics I see.. LOL Hallowed is the Goracle...


He's proud that he has not stopped despite recent requests for sanity in his threads.


----------



## ScienceRocks (Jul 13, 2011)




----------



## Chris (Jul 13, 2011)

Big Fitz said:


> gslack said:
> 
> 
> > Chris still posting numbers and colorful pics I see.. LOL Hallowed is the Goracle...
> ...



When faced with the facts, the right has only insults.

That's when you know they have lost the argument.


----------



## Chris (Jul 13, 2011)

Record Events for Wed Jul 6, 2011 through Tue Jul 12, 2011 

High Temperatures: 445 
Low Temperatures: 93

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## gslack (Jul 14, 2011)

Chris said:


> Record Events for Wed Jul 6, 2011 through Tue Jul 12, 2011
> 
> High Temperatures: 445
> Low Temperatures: 93
> ...



Dude you just pull up some weather reports and call it proof of climate change. Lets review; weather is what is happening now and in the recent past locally and climate is what has happened over the last several thousand years globally. Got it?


----------



## elvis (Jul 14, 2011)

Chris said:


> Big Fitz said:
> 
> 
> > gslack said:
> ...



No you lose arguments all the time.  You being a partisan hack piece of shit has nothing to do with that.


----------



## ScienceRocks (Jul 14, 2011)

gslack said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > Record Events for Wed Jul 6, 2011 through Tue Jul 12, 2011
> ...




Weather is in the here and now, but climate is weather over the longer term avg'ed. Weather can be 46f and raining as your dealing with a low pressure area, but climate is the collection of data showing what constitutes what is the overall avg for a place on earth.

What is a place on earth---Lets say Portland Oregon, where I live. The climate of Portland is rainy from Oct-April and drier and warm from May-Sept. That one point with many years of data you can get a picture of the climate. That is climate...Your right in a broad sense about the earth's overall climate of course.

You can have a avg for January here of 46f over the past 30 years. That means some years when you avg the high's up it can be above *that *and of course below *that*, but you get a monthly avg of 46f. You can do this for daily or weekly, which within Portland you start out near 42-43f, but then go up to near 48-49f by the last week of the month. You can do this for rainfall to. 

You can scale that up to western Oregon or the state of your choice. Eastern Oregon is going to have a hugely different climate then western , because of the rain shallow effect. So the coast range and cascades can get 60-70 inches a year; Portland 36 inches per year; Eastern Oregon 8-12 inches.   

So you got time scale, which can be for what is normal for a day, week, month or even a year over different scales of time. It DOESN"T needs to be thousands of years. Of course you can do that....

Next is the scale you wish to find the climate for. From your back yard over 3-4 years you can start to get a idea(of course this last part is time frame), but you can also get it for your state, nation or of course as you say globally.

Overall global climate changes can happen at scales of thousands of years, as you say, but can happen within dozens of decades like the younger dyes of 8,500 years ago or maybe the warm and cold cycles that we enjoy as a planet like the little ice age or mid evil warm period.


----------



## gslack (Jul 14, 2011)

Matthew said:


> gslack said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...



Thanks for the clarification on that mathew, but it was really unnecessary. You just took all that time and space to say basically the same thing I said. But then again I see you tried to twist it a bit to help chris. Point still remains he IS posting weather information and calling it evidence of climate change, and that is the bottom line.

I think your weather vs climate lesson would be best utilized on the guy who is posting weather reports and calling it climate change don't you?


----------



## Chris (Jul 14, 2011)

(CNN) -- Searing temperatures kept a firm grip on more than a handful southern states Thursday as forecasters warned of new areas of excessive heat for the weekend.

The number of states under heat advisories has diminished to seven. At its peak, the heat wave spread from the Plains to the Northeast, covering more than 20 states.

The National Weather Service is forecasting new hot spots in sections of Kansas, Missouri, Oklahoma and Arkansas.

"Warm and moist air in concert with clear skies will allow temperatures to rise about 100 degrees and will allow heat indices to rise above 105 degrees through at least Monday," the weather service said.

Nowhere has the heat been more persistent than Oklahoma.

In Norman, the capital, Chris McBee said he was able to fry an egg on the dashboard of his car, using just the heat of the car's interior, which was 181 degrees.

"I tried it; I didn't think it would work," said McBee. "It's been this hot before. ... I (fried an egg) last year where I just did it on the concrete."

Heat will bake Southern, Midwest states right through the weekend - CNN.com


----------



## Chris (Jul 14, 2011)

This month was the second warmest June at Grandfather Mountain, falling just short of last year&#8217;s record breaking heat.
The average high temperature of 72.6 degrees was 6.1 degrees warmer than normal for June, and the average low temperature of 56.3 degrees was 3.3 degrees above normal for this time of year.Daily high temperature records were broken five times during the month of June and tied one time.

Second-hottest June on record at Grandfather Mountain | The Asheville Citizen-Times | citizen-times.com


----------



## editec (Jul 14, 2011)

When one finds a consistent pattern of record breaking heat events and that trend continues over decades, that is a significant bit of data.

Denial of such obvious facts is simply ignorant.

Those data points and trends do not tell us their cause, or their cure, either.

But denying the statsitically obvious is something that only faith based thinkers can take much comfort in.


----------



## daveman (Jul 14, 2011)

editec said:


> When one finds a consistent pattern of record breaking heat events and that trend continues over decades, that is a significant bit of data.
> 
> Denial of such obvious facts is simply ignorant.
> 
> ...


Chris is posting events from this summer.  If you want to establish a trend with just one data point, go for it, but don't expect a standing ovation.


----------



## Big Fitz (Jul 14, 2011)

Chris said:


> Big Fitz said:
> 
> 
> > gslack said:
> ...


Constant denial of disagreeing scientific evidence, proof of contamination in your data sets and methods plus the outright rampant fraud and abuse of the 'peer review' process do not count as effective debate methods.

What have you got but bullshit numbers, corollary confused as causation and high assumption based on a religious faith that man is powerful enough to affect the planet's climate when it is clear that this is completely unprovable.  Basic 8th grade earth science of atmospheric composition debunks your entire theory.  

And yet, you claim that incidental weather events, which you state do not DISPROVE your theory, but can be used to PROVE your faith????

You're a fucking loon, you know it and so do the rest of us.  So I guess the question is, how much do you get paid per post to shill?  Or is it by word, or hour or are you salary?  Not to mention, who pays you?


----------



## gslack (Jul 14, 2011)

Chris said:


> (CNN) -- Searing temperatures kept a firm grip on more than a handful southern states Thursday as forecasters warned of new areas of excessive heat for the weekend.
> 
> The number of states under heat advisories has diminished to seven. At its peak, the heat wave spread from the Plains to the Northeast, covering more than 20 states.
> 
> ...



Oh my CNN!.. LOL well then it must be gospel. All hail the goracle.


----------



## Chris (Jul 14, 2011)

editec said:


> When one finds a consistent pattern of record breaking heat events and that trend continues over decades, that is a significant bit of data.
> 
> Denial of such obvious facts is simply ignorant.
> 
> ...



All of the record heat comes with the sun at its lowest level of activity in 80 years.

Why?


----------



## FuelRod (Jul 14, 2011)

It's a reminicent of the Dust Bowl era.


----------



## ScienceRocks (Jul 14, 2011)

NOAA, National Environmental Satellite, Data, 

Note: The data presented in this report are preliminary. Ranks and anomalies may change as more complete data are received and processed. Effective May 2, 2011, the GHCN-M version 3 dataset of monthly mean temperature replaced the GHCN-M version 2 monthly mean temperature dataset. Beginning with the April 2011 Global monthly State of the Climate Report, GHCN-M version 3 is used for NCDC climate monitoring activities, including calculation of global land surface temperature anomalies and trends.

    The combined global land and ocean average surface temperature for June 2011 was the seventh warmest on record at 16.54°C (60.94°F), which is 0.58°C (1.04°F) above the 20th century average of 15.5°C (59.9°F).

    June 2011 was the 316th consecutive month with a global temperature above the 20th century average. The last month with below-average temperature was February 1985.

    The June worldwide average land surface temperature was 0.89°C (1.60°F) above the 20th century average of 13.3°C (55.9°F)&#8212;the fourth warmest on record.

    The global average ocean surface temperature was the 10th warmest June on record, at 0.47°C (0.85°F) above average. Neither El Niño nor La Niña conditions were present during June 2011. According to NOAA's Climate Prediction Center, these ENSO-neutral conditions are expected to continue into the Northern Hemisphere fall 2011.

    The first half of 2011 (January&#8211;June) was the 11th warmest on record for the combined global land and ocean surface temperature. Separately, the worldwide average ocean temperature was also the 11th warmest January&#8211;June and the worldwide average land temperature was the 12th warmest such period.


June Global Hemisphere plot
Land and Ocean tied with 1999 as 12th warmest on record.


----------



## gslack (Jul 14, 2011)

Chris said:


> editec said:
> 
> 
> > When one finds a consistent pattern of record breaking heat events and that trend continues over decades, that is a significant bit of data.
> ...



Quick review: The sun's position in our solar system and galaxy relative to other galaxies and their position in the universe, the relative activity of the sun and other nearby radiation emitting stars which may effect our solar system, and various other elements known or as of yet unknown, the amount of cloud cover we receive in various areas of the planet (like over a desert or ocean) can and will effect our own climate far more than a trace gas making up 0.0387% of our atmosphere.

The fact is you are not even touching the tip of the proverbial iceberg when it comes to climate by pointing at CO2 like a hunting dog. Their are so many more things out there that effect our climate you are missing the forest view because the trees are in your way.

You can try and pretend you understand the big picture by posting one small part out of a 100 thousand parts until the planet does cool and we go into an ice age, but it will not make you any more correct or knowledgeable of it.

Now when you start looking at the big picture and stop looking at climate with your blinders on I may treat you algorians a little better, but until then you will get my scorn.


----------



## Chris (Jul 14, 2011)

gslack said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > editec said:
> ...



You did not answer the question.

All of the record heat comes with the sun at its lowest level of activity in 80 years.

Why?


----------



## ScienceRocks (Jul 14, 2011)

Chris said:


> gslack said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...



If this keeps up it could go from 80 to 150 or more years.


----------



## IanC (Jul 14, 2011)

I dont think we can be sure about the energy coming from the sun. there are a lot of different wavelengths and our ability to measure them varies. especially before satellites


----------



## ScienceRocks (Jul 14, 2011)

IanC said:


> I dont think we can be sure about the energy coming from the sun. there are a lot of different wavelengths and our ability to measure them varies. especially before satellites





We know, because the Holocene climate optimum(Yes part of the warming was caused because of orbit and incline of the earth, but still) , roman warm period, mid evil warm period, little ice age and dalton events where within max's or mins of a solar cycle. From 1860-1950 60 percent of the .4 or so warming up to that time was because of the sun cycle.


----------



## Patrick2 (Jul 14, 2011)

Remember last winter when people were freezing their asses off in NYC and DC, and when you pointed that out to the GW crowd, they shrugged and said "that's weather, not climate"? 

Last summer was the coldest I have experienced in 15 years in *southern california*, I didn't go to the beach a single time, and people were calling it "the year without a summer".  This year it has been too cold to do anything up to about the beginning of july.  We had a few normal days, now it's back to cold.  Is that "climate"?  

Oh wait....wait.......I've got it: when it's unusually cold, that's "weather", when it's unusually hot, that's "climate".


----------



## ScienceRocks (Jul 14, 2011)

Patrick2 said:


> Remember last winter when people were freezing their asses off in NYC and DC, and when you pointed that out to the GW crowd, they shrugged and said "that's weather, not climate"?
> 
> Last summer was the coldest I have experienced in 15 years in *southern California*, I didn't go to the beach a single time, and people were calling it "the year without a summer".  This year it has been too cold to do anything up to about the beginning of july.  We had a few normal days, now it's back to cold.  Is that "climate"?
> 
> Oh wait....wait.......I've got it: when it's unusually cold, that's "weather", when it's unusually hot, that's "climate".




Caused by a death ridge over the midwest at 500 millibars. On each side of a ridge there is normally a "trough" a trough is a dip within the jet stream with the cooler air to the north of the jet stream...So imagine the midwest is within a intense ridge with record hot and dry weather, but the west coast is within the cold and rainy crap. One of the coldest for Portland in the past 70 years so far.  Lets think about the ridge as divergence at the surface, which pretty much means the air is moving inwards at the upper levels 200-300 millibars, but moving outwards as it moves to 500 to 1013 millibars. What this does is increase the pressure of the column of air and that rises the pressure.  This also does the opposite of the air within a area of low pressure. Air within the northern side of the jet stream normally favors low pressure area's and is cooler as said above. Low pressure moves inward and warm moist air raises into the Atmosphere and cools towards its dew point--->this is what we call condensation once it cools to that.  Clouds and rainy weather. The air raising from the surface to the 25-40 thousand feet is why a low pressure is called a low pressure, and is why it lowers the pressure as the column of air is now pressing down less pressure onto the surface.

A low pressure of 992 millibars is causing 9,920 bars of pressure on the surface, but a high could cause 1020 millibars or 10,200 bars onto that surface.  In yes that is a difference of air pressure pressing onto the surface.

Not really so much climate when you think about the day to day, but imagine for a second that the above avg area's are above normal, but cover a larger area of the earth and of course your going to get below normal area's at the same time---the earth is not uniform my friends...It really is how you avg it out is how you get a idea of what changes a change climate may of had. Europe and the east coast last winter was very cold, but the arctic was 10-15c warmer then normal at the same time. Much of northern russia to was warmer if I remember...

*Lets look at this in another way...*

You have 10,526,000 sq miles of .5c above normal
You have 6,546,456 sq miles at -.5c above normal
Yes this is very simple, but lets say for a second that those two made up the surface area of the earth...You would have a above normal global avg!

Portland can be colder, but a larger percentage of the United states has been above normal so far this summer season---In I agree it is one of the coldest summers I've seen.

Here is a 500 millibar level map!


----------



## IanC (Jul 14, 2011)

matt- last summer a paper came out describing the large increase in certain bands of SW radiation even though the TSI was decreasing. we have no way of knowing whether the solar output of today is the same as hundreds of years ago simply by counting sunspots.


----------



## daveman (Jul 14, 2011)

Matthew said:


> IanC said:
> 
> 
> > I dont think we can be sure about the energy coming from the sun. there are a lot of different wavelengths and our ability to measure them varies. especially before satellites
> ...


How do we know what wavelengths were radiated during the Holocene?


----------



## daveman (Jul 14, 2011)

Patrick2 said:


> Remember last winter when people were freezing their asses off in NYC and DC, and when you pointed that out to the GW crowd, they shrugged and said "that's weather, not climate"?
> 
> Last summer was the coldest I have experienced in 15 years in *southern california*, I didn't go to the beach a single time, and people were calling it "the year without a summer".  This year it has been too cold to do anything up to about the beginning of july.  We had a few normal days, now it's back to cold.  Is that "climate"?
> 
> Oh wait....wait.......I've got it: when it's unusually cold, that's "weather", when it's unusually hot, that's "climate".


Hot damn!  The noob cracked the code!


----------



## Chris (Jul 14, 2011)

IanC said:


> I dont think we can be sure about the energy coming from the sun. there are a lot of different wavelengths and our ability to measure them varies. especially before satellites



Sorry, that doesn't cut it.

The sun is at its lowest level of activity in 80 years and yet we keep having record heat, and the polar ice cap continues to melt.

Why?


----------



## ScienceRocks (Jul 14, 2011)

daveman said:


> Matthew said:
> 
> 
> > IanC said:
> ...



Dave---The sun stays around the same wave length within the visible for most of its energy; fairly short wave, but the solar winds within a solar minimum or low maximum grand minimum like set up are "lower" too. More or less cloud formation=lower or higher reflection of energy within the mid to upper Troposphere. 

The H.C.O or H.C.M was a period of maximum orbit that allows for the most solar energy throughout the year to make it to earth for one, and two studies have shown that the earth was more inclined in away that promotes warming of the poles. You didn't have as much warming at the equator, but you had a huge temperature shift at the poles, which melted those glacial.






Two and a half solar cycles of Total Solar Irradiance (TSI), also called 'solar constant'. This composite, compiled by the VIRGO team at the Physikalisch-Meteorologisches Observatorium / World Radiation Center Davos, Switzerland, shows TSI as daily values plotted in different colors for the different originating experiments. The difference between the minima values is also indicated, together with amplitudes of the three cycles.  Image courtesy of SOHO consortium a project of international cooperation between ESA and NASA.

Because there is a "slight" decrease within the output doesn't mean it changes wave length.


----------



## daveman (Jul 14, 2011)

Matthew said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Matthew said:
> ...


I'm _vastly_ skeptical of definitive statements based on indirect observation, especially at such a great distance in time.  

There are so many things we simply don't know much about.  What's going on with the climate right now is one of them.  What went on with the climate before man took direct measurements is another.  

Guess it's just one of those things you have to take on faith.


----------



## ScienceRocks (Jul 14, 2011)

daveman said:


> Matthew said:
> 
> 
> > daveman said:
> ...



Your right, a lot of science is faith within idea's that have huge holes or missing parts within them. As we study and discover new idea's and "things" we learn more and more, but there is a lot of faith. We argue and for the same reason why people have done that since the dawn of time. 120 years ago we didn't think that the continents moved on plates or planet tectonics or even what the brents floods where all about. Hell most people thought we would never be able to fly within airplanes let alone go into space. 

Yes dave we do use some faith.


----------



## westwall (Jul 14, 2011)

Chris said:


> IanC said:
> 
> 
> > I dont think we can be sure about the energy coming from the sun. there are a lot of different wavelengths and our ability to measure them varies. especially before satellites
> ...






Actually the sun is at it's lowest _SUNSPOT _ activity not it's overall energy output.  IR is normal but it is UV that can penetrate deep enough into the oceans to cause heating and that has dropped off dramatically recently.  And once again, things take time on mother earth. 

The poles have more ice at them now then they had in the 1960's why is that?  

Glaciers are advancing all over the planet, why?

Multi year ice has increased in the Arctic for the last two years, why?


----------



## ScienceRocks (Jul 14, 2011)

westwall said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > IanC said:
> ...



The overall ice between the poles have decreased. Sure you can make a case that the core of greenlands ice sheets have increased, but that is mostly because of a increase in moisture. 





Figure 2: Ice mass changes for the Antarctic ice sheet from April 2002 to February 2009. Unfiltered data are blue crosses. Data filtered for the seasonal dependence are red crosses. The best-fitting quadratic trend is shown as the green line (Velicogna 2009). 

Mass of the antarctic ice sheet. What you see is sea ice increasing...

Sea ice 





"If the Southern Ocean is warming, why is Antarctic sea ice increasing? There are several contributing factors. One is the drop in ozone levels over Antarctica. The hole in the ozone layer above the South Pole has caused cooling in the stratosphere (Gillet 2003). This strengthens the cyclonic winds that circle the Antarctic continent (Thompson 2002). The wind pushes sea ice around, creating areas of open water known as polynyas. More polynyas lead to increased sea ice production (Turner 2009)."






The GRACE data offers a complete picture of the entire ice sheet, allowing comparisons of mass changes in coastal regions (eg - elevations below 2000 metres) with the Greenland interior (above 2000 metres). Over the period 2003 to 2008, the coastal regions were observed to be losing ice mass while the interior was in approximate mass balance. The overall result is that the Greenland ice sheet is losing ice mass (Wouters 2008).






Figure 1: Global sea ice extent since 1979. (Image source: Tamino. Data is from US National Snow and Ice Data Center.)


----------



## Big Fitz (Jul 14, 2011)

... and the denial of debunking marches on.


----------



## ScienceRocks (Jul 14, 2011)

Big Fitz said:


> ... and the denial of debunking marches on.





Where has this data been debunked?


----------



## gslack (Jul 14, 2011)

Chris said:


> gslack said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...



YO TOOL! The statement was about you taking one part of a much bigger picture and blaming the climate on it.  Sunspot activity alone is not evidence which was my entire point. Stop being obtuse.. Also can you show me where you get the idea the suns is at its lowest level of activity in 80 years? I know that is incorrect, and I will show you but first lets see your proof of the claim... 

*warning severe spanking coming...


----------



## gslack (Jul 14, 2011)

Matthew said:


> IanC said:
> 
> 
> > I dont think we can be sure about the energy coming from the sun. there are a lot of different wavelengths and our ability to measure them varies. especially before satellites
> ...



Can we see some proof on those claims?


----------



## ScienceRocks (Jul 14, 2011)

gslack said:


> Matthew said:
> 
> 
> > IanC said:
> ...



The solar cycle fits perfectly in with the climate cycles of the past 8,000 years within the Holocene, so your really going to tell me the strongest scientific support we have for the little ice age to med evil warm period is something you don't even support. Hell when I was a skeptic I would defend it to my death---still will. You people like to say ITS THE SUN!!! ITS the fucking SUN on all your boards. The roman, mid evil, little ice age, which was like 3 solar minimums over 500 or so years and the Dalton were all solar caused. 

This shows that from 1860 about the end of the dalton straight up through 1940's-1950's time frame that much of the warming was caused by solar tsi increasing. Since the global temperature and tsi has been moving apart. 





Global temperature (red, NASA GISS) and Total solar irradiance (blue, 1880 to 1978 from Solanki, 1979 to 2009 from PMOD).

This my friends and wirebender is what I was saying about variable z. It is moving away from each other=natural forcing is not causing the warming today.






PMOD TSI

Figure 2: Total Solar Irradiance as measured by satellite from 1978 to 2010 

Solar activity & climate: is the sun causing global warming?

This is where I got the data from 1880-1940 for the sun/natural climatic warming. 

"We can confirm this by comparing the calculation to empirical observations.  From 1900 to 1950 the Earth's surface temperature warmed by about 0.4°C.  Over that period, humans increased the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere by about 20 parts per million by volume.  This corresponds to an anthropogenic warming of:

dT = &#955;*dF = 5.35*(0.54 to 1.2°C/[W-m-2]*ln(310/295) = 0.14 to 0.32°C with a most likely value of 0.22°C.

Therefore, the solar forcing combined with the anthropogenic CO2 forcing and other minor forcings (such as decreased volcanic activity) can account for the 0.4°C warming in the early 20th century, with the solar forcing accounting for about 40% of the total warming.  Over the past century, this increase in TSI is responsible for about 15-20% of global warming (Meehl 2004).  But since TSI hasn't increased in at least the past 32 years (and more like 60 years, based on reconstructions), the Sun is not directly responsible for the warming over that period."

Ok, Ok it was 40%, but I believe it maybe a lot more(60-70 percent in my opinion). 

What turned me is the fact that I believed that the solar grand minimum that we're in---yes this is the lowest combined min and max since 1908-1913 event. In the first cycle as one of my charts posted on one of these threads show is following the first cycle of the dalton nicely. 

Here is a sun spot graph showing the later part of the little ice age





Wow, this shows the as I said above with the little ice age and the med evil. The med evil warm period!!!





Finally for the past 10k years





Wow, holy crap it matches the temperature data we have for that period and it matches the sun cycles. You would have to be blind not to see sun cycles=temperature within the natural set up of things. 

But back again to what turned me...
What turned me away from skepticism of any global warming---yes I was a total believer in the forces of natural forcing and laughed at any idea global warming, but past 5-6 years have shown me that it is NOT cooling when it supposed to be. You can't spit in the face of what I shown you above because that is the facts. Something is causing z. So I've slowly moved and joined the nut case warmers. The z is the moving away of the natural to temperature ratio.


----------



## gslack (Jul 14, 2011)

Matthew said:


> gslack said:
> 
> 
> > Matthew said:
> ...



Looking at all of your charts I can see a few things. 

1. You didn't address what I wanted to see proof of. Proof that his assertions were incorrect for one, and two that before satelites the measurements are reliable. Remember the post you responded to? His assertion was "I dont think we can be sure about the energy coming from the sun. there are a lot of different wavelengths and our ability to measure them varies. especially before satellites". You claimed the following "We know, because the Holocene climate optimum(Yes part of the warming was caused because of orbit and incline of the earth, but still) , roman warm period, mid evil warm period, little ice age and dalton events where within max's or mins of a solar cycle. From 1860-1950 60 percent of the .4 or so warming up to that time was because of the sun cycle." we all know a great many believe the sun was the main cause of those events no one disputed that. I disputed your claim that his assertion was wrong.

2. One of your charts shows solar heat increasing while sunspot activity decreasing. Where as you seem to keep agreeing with the other posts on here claiming that sunspot activity at a low proves the suns not warming the planet more. So which is it?

*edit: BTW, if the suns caused those instances of climate change, why is it not possible today?


----------



## IanC (Jul 14, 2011)

so Matt- do you believe the land temps or the sea temps? are sea levels more indicative than arctic ice levels. perhaps equatorial temps are the best indicator because they drive the rest of the systems. 

anyone can find evidence for their opinion by weighting their favourite indicator higher than the others. personally I think equtorial and ocean based changes are first order and therefore more important but hey- what do I know?


----------



## ScienceRocks (Jul 14, 2011)

gslack said:


> Matthew said:
> 
> 
> > gslack said:
> ...



*
So you don't trust the satellite data, so I can understand why you wouldn't trust the carbon data or any of the other crap that we use to tell climate of the past. Lets just throw it all the hell out because it is useless. How about that?*

The first to second graph shows about what it should show; as the first graph is the trend(11 year avg'ed) and the second on is with the cycles them selfs. The trend is downwards. 

3rd graph shows from 1600 to today with the little ice age and then rising out of it. It doesn't show the downslope so good the past 30 years, but it shows it slightly from the 1960s-1970 time frame. That is looking at a horizontal of over 400 fucking years, so what can you expect? The 4th is a even longer scale showing the whole little ice age and the med evil warm period. 

If you throw out the sun causing the natural cycles then you throw out everything we understand about energy moving into the system its self. So you people want to say that the green house effect is A LIE, Satellite data is a lie, data that we get from tree rings, boar holes, carbon, ocean bed sediment, ect is useless. Why not just say that it all can't be trusted from the start? I don't understand. Be honest g. 


As for your edited part---O'hell it was happening as I said up till 1950-1960, but remember how the red and blue chart how the lines moved away from each other...Guess what that shows, that natural forcing is not doing it; NOT NOW, but we can't trust satellite data let alone anything further down the line. This is unwinnable from a scientific stand point as all data is found to be a fraud and a crock. Over and over again...One big turning cluster fuck.

Hell why do I say that? Because I agree we're using some faith trusting any earlier then 1970. So that gives us 40 years of data to truly debate. But I try to give some faith to the longer term data to enhance our understanding. Yes there is faith in science and we must use what ever as a tool to enhance on our understanding. It is not 100 percent G. 

What does faith tell me. It tells me to respect the solar cycles and the natural cycles, but when there is a divergence you then need to find out why that is occurring.


----------



## ScienceRocks (Jul 15, 2011)

IanC said:


> so Matt- do you believe the land temps or the sea temps? are sea levels more indicative than arctic ice levels. perhaps equatorial temps are the best indicator because they drive the rest of the systems.
> 
> anyone can find evidence for their opinion by weighting their favourite indicator higher than the others. personally I think equtorial and ocean based changes are first order and therefore more important but hey- what do I know?




I think your very knowledgeable, but here is a interesting graph based off of sea level. Shouldn't the mid evil have higher ocean levels?






RealClimate: 2000 Years of Sea Level (+updates)






Comparison of Mann et al (2008) global mean (land+ocean) temperature reconstruction with and without the 7 proxy records discussed in the text [shown in both cases is the low-frequency (>20 year timescale) component of the reconstruction]. Reconstruction is based on calibration against the HadCRUT3 series using the global proxy network
.


----------



## IanC (Jul 15, 2011)

I like your style Matt. skeptical in the true meaning. I am more opinionated because I have gone through more cycles of public opinion and I cant find enough free thinkers like Feynman to lead us past arguement by authority. solar scientists like Lean have tried to clarify the picture but they get shouted down and everyone is supposed to ignore the uncertainty and make a stand one one side or the other. 

the quest for accuracy in the speed of light brought amazing results in many fields of science. the quest for understanding climate science will also bring great knowledge to science in many areas.


----------



## Chris (Jul 15, 2011)

gslack said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > gslack said:
> ...



First you will deny the facts. Then after I post the facts, you will deny that the facts matter.

Then when I post the facts again. You will insult me. I know the pattern of grief well.

Denial, anger, non acceptance of reality,

..................................................

U.S. solar physicists say the sun is experiencing the least sunspot activity since 1913 and activity is becoming less frequent.
National Aeronautics and Space Administration solar physicist Dean Pesnell at the Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Md., said during 2008 there were no sunspots observed on 266 of the year's 366 days -- 73 percent of the year. To find a year with more blank suns, you have to go to 1913, which had 311 spotless days.

That has led some observers to suggest the solar cycle hit bottom last year. But Pesnell says that might not be the case, since, there were no sunspots on 78 of this year's first 90 days -- 87 percent of that period.

In addition, measurements by the Ulysses spacecraft reveal a 20 percent drop in solar wind since the mid-1990s -- the lowest since such measurements began in the 1960s. And NASA says the sun's brightness has dimmed 0.02 percent at visible wavelengths and 6 percent at extreme UV wavelengths since the solar minimum of 1996.

Solar activity lowest in nearly 100 years


----------



## westwall (Jul 15, 2011)

Matthew said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...







Actually the vast majority of the new ice in Antarctica was accreted to the bottom of the ice sheet.  No precip needed or even possible.


----------



## westwall (Jul 15, 2011)

Chris said:


> gslack said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...






How about answering my questions Chris.


----------



## Chris (Jul 15, 2011)

westwall said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > gslack said:
> ...



I'm done with you, my friend. 

You are just an oil company troll.


----------



## ScienceRocks (Jul 15, 2011)

westwall said:


> Matthew said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...





How does that work?


----------



## Chris (Jul 15, 2011)

Record Events for Fri Jul 8, 2011 through Thu Jul 14, 2011 

High Temperatures: 482 
Low Temperatures: 113 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 15, 2011)

Chris said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...




heres something to focus on s0n, as the next summer heat wave approches..........maybe get your mind off the temperature for a spell...........

Apparently, some animals are getting depressd over the weather in Russia.........and since most k00ks love this stuff...........


'Depressed' Ferret Flees Siberian Circus | News | The Moscow Times


Too.......make sure to go over the DRUDGE today. He's got lots and lots of maps with big-ass red blotches all over them to show temperature gradients!!


----------



## gslack (Jul 15, 2011)

Matthew said:


> gslack said:
> 
> 
> > Matthew said:
> ...



Hey tool, don't quote me then post your nonsense inside my posts.. Shows you are either stupid or trying to pull something... Which is it?

DUDE, read much? 

I said " Proof that his assertions were incorrect for one, and two that before satelites the measurements are reliable."

The previous post you responded to said the data was unreliable before satelites. BEFORE them as in before they came along. moron... YOU claimed it was reliable because of the Halocene ... I asked for proof from you that he was wrong. You then posted a bunch more graphs with very interpretive and vague explanations of their relevance. (vague as in a lot of words but very little substance). And now you continue the charade and trying to make out I said something else...

TRY READING THE POSTS FIRST NEXT TIME.


----------



## gslack (Jul 15, 2011)

Chris said:


> gslack said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...



OK chris you asked for an apology.. I am very sorry you are such a blind algorian tool.. Dude you didn't post a single shred of anything to counter anybodys points.. so stop lying already..


----------



## Big Black Dog (Jul 15, 2011)

It was so hot here today that I went outside and I happened to see a lizard.  The lizard was sweating.  I've never seen a lizard sweating before...


----------



## Chris (Jul 15, 2011)

gslack said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > gslack said:
> ...



As I suspected, you are just a troll.


----------



## gslack (Jul 15, 2011)

Chris said:


> gslack said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...



Na I am no troll, just someone who is tired of your kind of alarmist BS. And I do not waste time or mince words with people who claim science and then deny all other science they don't like. You post science that is convenient to your cause or belief system. You have no real applicable knowledge of it or how it works or anything about it other than it supports your agenda. Dude you post temperature data nonstop and pretend its climate change evidence despite the fact your own scientists you agree with tell you that it is not evidence of climate change. You just go on and pretend they meant something else or any other excuse you can use.

And now you have a clone who follows you around and tries to support your crap with more crap. The sad part is he can't even follow what he is replying to well enough to make a cohesive argument. 

Pathetic, one of you has nothing but temperature data to post and say "see its warming", and the other hasn't got enough of an attention span to follow his own arguments. 

I'm no climate scientist but I at least have enough respect for them and their field not to cherry pick evidence and make wild claims on it. There are a lot more factors to catastrophic climate changes than CO2 or current temperature data. And by current we mean in a climate sense. 5,10,15,50,100 or even 400 years is no way to judge a climate norm. What is the climate norm for this planet? You don't know but you try and pretend its warming out of control with only circumstantial evidence at best.

 Dude I got a brain buster for ya, what if there is no reliable "norm" for the climate of this planet? What if the climate has always changed and always will? How can you judge what is warmer than it should be at this time and place when its been changing from birth?

Now start posting something worth the time and effort and I may start putting more effort into my responses to you.


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 15, 2011)

Big Black Dog said:


> It was so hot here today that I went outside and I happened to see a lizard.  The lizard was sweating.  I've never seen a lizard sweating before...




Give him a Gatorade s0n.........and tell him its summer in the northern hemisphere!!


----------



## daveman (Jul 15, 2011)

Matthew said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Matthew said:
> ...


And some ideas take more faith than others.  The problem comes when some people who believe those ideas put the ideas ahead of science, and manipulate and distort data and models to support what they believe.  

That's not science.


----------



## westwall (Jul 15, 2011)

Chris said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...









  You're the chappie shilling for them!  I am trying to keep them from making billions for nothing, you on the other hand are aiding and abetting them and your buddies over at Goldman Sachs, you know those pricks responsible for kicking vast numbers of Americans out of their homes.  Yeah, you're the shill here Chrissy poo.


----------



## westwall (Jul 15, 2011)

Matthew said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > Matthew said:
> ...








Thousands of feet of ice have been found to accrete to the bottom of the ice sheet.  The discovery has turned the ice world upside down.



"Studies of under-ice lakes in Antarctica first alerted scientists to the capability of pooled melt-water to refreeze on the bottom of ice sheets and deform the upper layers. But this accretion ice was considered an anomaly "a weird thing that happened over sub-glacial lakes," not over the entire ice sheet, Antarctic geophysicist Robin E. Bell of Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory told Discovery News.

But in examining bright spots found at the bottom of the Antarctic ice sheet, Bell and colleagues have since discovered water is interacting with over a quarter of the bottom of the ice sheet - freezing and pushing the entire ice sheet up in a way that is surprisingly similar to the lake effect. "In fact, I'd forgotten the connection until last night," she said in an interview today.

The new discovery is adding an unknown dimension to the overall layer-cake growth model for ice sheets: that ice sheets gain height one layer at a time as the amount of snow falling on the top outpaces the amount of ice melting at the bottom. Bell and her team using ice-penetrating radar atop Antarctica have just turned this idea upside down.

"In some places up to half the ice thickness has been added from below," Bell and her international team of colleagues, reported in the new issue of the online journal Sciencexpress.



Working with new radars and other imaging techniques at the crown of the East Antarctic Ice Sheet, the researchers identify two mechanisms that lead to the formation of "freeze-on" ice at the base of the ice sheet. In one case, water at the bottom of ice-filled valleys, refreezes to the base of the mile-thick ice because of the water's close proximity to the overlying ice and fluid flow into the above ice matrix where instead of melting the ice around it, the convective thermal transfer of energy results in the water freezing and buoying up the ice sheet, leading to bending and modifying of the layers to the point of top layer erosion."








Antarctica Growing From The Bottom Up : Discovery News


----------



## westwall (Jul 15, 2011)

Chris said:


> gslack said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...







Yeah, we're the trolls and you can't answer simple questions based on OBSERVED data, unlike your clowns computer modelled hocus pocus.

That's too funny.


----------



## Big Fitz (Jul 15, 2011)

Chris said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...


ROFL  Denial once again marches on, spitefully.

"I've been pwnd again and can't admit it lest I lose pay.

fucking shill.


----------



## Mr. H. (Jul 15, 2011)

Whole lotta hot going on the next few days. 

Another blast of heat to hit U.S. - Yahoo! News


----------



## editec (Jul 15, 2011)

Based purely on todays weather here in Maine, we are apparently experiencing a period of Global _Wonderful_ing.

Why don't we debate whether the wonderfulingness is anthropogenic, too?

Makes about as much sense as these incessent arguments we're having about the climate now, doesn't it?


----------



## westwall (Jul 15, 2011)

editec said:


> Based purely on todays weather here in Maine, we are apparently experiencing a period of Global _Wonderful_ing.
> 
> Why don't we debate whether the wonderfulingness is anthropogenic, too?
> 
> Makes about as much sense as these incessent arguments we're having about the climate now, doesn't it?








  Yes it probably would!  We too are having a wonderful summer.  We've been 10 degrees below average for most of the summer.  Spring was cold though.  In fact we didn't really get our spring "weather" till a week before summer began.  It is staying cool all through this week and probably into the next.  We've only run the A/C three times.


----------



## Chris (Jul 15, 2011)

Big Fitz said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...



Hardly.

But when someone admits that they are an oil company shill, there's no need for me to waste my time.


----------



## Chris (Jul 15, 2011)

Warmest summer on record in Texas....

CHICAGO (Reuters) - A massive heat wave is expected to develop over much of the central and eastern United States beginning on Friday with heat index values that could reach 115 degrees.

The big story for the coming weekend will be the building heat," said Jim Keeney, a National Weather Service meteorologist. "It looks like it's going to be a long-term heat wave."

In the thick of the heat wave is Oklahoma where Governor Mary Fallin asked Oklahomans to pray for rain this Sunday.

"The power of prayer is a wonderful thing, and I would ask every Oklahoman to look to a greater power this weekend and ask for rain," Fallin said in a news release on Thursday.

Fallin on Thursday also issued a ban on outdoor burning for the western half of the state because of the extreme drought conditions.

"The number of wildfires we have had over the last few months is extremely tough on our state firefighters," Fallin said.

"It's a drain on their resources as well as a physical drain. Anything that can be done to minimize fires will help to keep both our firefighters and the public safe. I'm asking all Oklahomans to be vigilant and to do their part in preventing fires."

Earlier this year Texas Governor Rick Perry asked Texans to pray for rain because of the drought there.

As of July 12, about 72 percent of Texas and 43 percent of Oklahoma are experiencing the worst possible drought conditions, according to the U.S. Drought Monitor.

On Thursday, 10 states were under heat advisories or watches, down from earlier in the week when 24 states were on the list.

*"The worst states are Texas, Oklahoma and Louisiana," said Victor Murphy, a weather service meteorologist, who said Texas is seeing the warmest summer on record so far.*Another blast of heat to hit U.S. - Yahoo! News


----------



## westwall (Jul 15, 2011)

Chris said:


> Big Fitz said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...







What crime on this board led to you losing all of your rep?  Hmmmmm?  Once a perjuror allways a purjuror chrissypoo.  What lie did you get caught telling?


----------



## Chris (Jul 15, 2011)

westwall said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > Big Fitz said:
> ...





I told Gunny I didn't care about reps!


----------



## Chris (Jul 15, 2011)

Record Events for Fri Jul 8, 2011 through Thu Jul 14, 2011 

High Temperatures: 489 
Low Temperatures: 123 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## Big Fitz (Jul 15, 2011)

Chris said:


> Big Fitz said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...


Huh.  To work in an organization automatically means you shill for one.  Good to know.  

So the fact that I'm a government employee in a public sector union that wants to see it busted doesn't fit into this cozy little worldview of yours does it?

Of course your logic means that you're an ecofascist shill for some government funded fraud study.  Yo do realize this if course.


----------



## Chris (Jul 15, 2011)

Already during July, 882 record high temperatures have been tied or set across the U.S. At the same time, drought is more extensive than any time since at least 2000. Over the weekend and next week, the drought will worsen in many areas while a remarkable burst of humid heat surges north and then east. 

The U.S. Drought Monitor released Thursday showed 29 percent of the country in drought, and 12 percent of the country in exceptional drought, the largest extent on record (though records only go back to 2000). 

Extreme heat wave to spread across U.S., drought conditions to worsen - Capital Weather Gang - The Washington Post


----------



## ScienceRocks (Jul 15, 2011)




----------



## gslack (Jul 15, 2011)

"Look at the charts and graphs and despair! Doom will visit onto him that does not repent and embrace the Goracle as his savior..."  - The Tao of Algorianism, Book of Deniers, Chapter 2, verse 10.


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 16, 2011)

To my denier, clueless retard compadres..............this is a must read.It will bring a gigantic-ass smile to your face, especially when you realize that stuff like this is happening ALL over the country = a rejection of this global warming nonsense and a return to common sense.

Like I keep saying..........nobody gives a rats ass about the science.

From todays Columbus Dispatch...........


*High costs bury AEP's carbon plan*

Lower natural gas prices and policy concerns also affected decision 
Friday, July 15, 2011  02:51 AM 

*High costs have trumped high hopes in the quest to reduce globe-warming pollution from coal-fired power plants.*

A day after American Electric Power said it would halt a project to bury carbon dioxide deep beneath a coal-fired power plant in West Virginia, experts say the decision *reflects a seismic change in the economics of generating electricity.*Since AEP announced its $668 million "carbon-capture" plan in 2009, estimates of the cost of the technology have grown. Natural-gas prices also have plummeted, and Congress has been unable to agree on a system for regulating carbon dioxide.

"Urgency has been diminished," said Chris Lafakis, an energy economist for Moody's Analytics.

Those same dollars might be better spent on building natural-gas-fired power plants, he said.

*"It's a very different kind of world we're looking at now," said Kenneth B. Medlock III, an energy economist at Rice University in Houston.*

One of the key differences is that Congress isn't close to an agreement about carbon regulation. As recently as 2008, many observers viewed such a deal as inevitable and those assumptions made carbon capture seem more feasible, he said.

Industry officials say clean-coal research is still very much alive. Southern Co. is testing a similar carbon-dioxide system at its Barry power plant in Alabama, said Revis James, director of the Electric Power Research Institute's Energy Technology Assessment Center.

"The stoppage of work at Mountaineer is not going to fundamentally change what we are going to do," James said, referring to the name of the AEP plant.

A new coal plant with carbon capture would cost $137 per megawatt-hour, according to the most-recent forecast from the Energy Information Administration. That is based on the estimated cost of construction and operation in 2016. The amount is more than double the cost from a gas-fired plant, which is $62.

Those numbers do not reflect the costs to modify plants such as Mountaineer.

AEP officials said the decision was tied to the sluggish economy and lingering uncertainty about federal energy policy. Spokesman Pat Hemlepp said the rising cost of carbon capture was not a significant factor, noting that "costs always rise" on construction projects




High costs bury AEP's carbon plan | The Columbus Dispatch


ANd go google the success of the northeast RGGI scam. Its in the toilet......a BS carbon reducing effort between states. Nobody cares about it in 2011.


And it leaves me laughing....................my ass off. Because all the OCD bozo's in here..........but especially Rolling Thunder..........think this shit is marching forward unabated because there is a consensus on the science.










PS........the operative word in the above article is????

How about............*seismic*


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 16, 2011)

IDK..........Id say for the alarmist mental cases, its just about time to call in Gigantor................















Ask me how much fun it is to come in here all the time and keep winning?????????????????????????


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 16, 2011)

To my denier, clueless retard compadres..............this is a must read. It will bring a gigantic-ass smile to your face, especially when you realize that stuff like this is happening ALL over the country = a rejection of this global warming nonsense and a return to common sense.

Like I keep saying..........nobody gives a rats ass about the science.

From todays Columbus Dispatch...........


*High costs bury AEP's carbon plan*
Lower natural gas prices and policy concerns also affected decision 
Friday, July 15, 2011 02:51 AM 

*High costs have trumped high hopes in the quest to reduce globe-warming pollution from coal-fired power plants.*

A day after American Electric Power said it would halt a project to bury carbon dioxide deep beneath a coal-fired power plant in West Virginia, experts say the decision *reflects a seismic change in the economics of generating electricity*. Since AEP announced its $668 million "carbon-capture" plan in 2009, estimates of the cost of the technology have grown. Natural-gas prices also have plummeted, and Congress has been unable to agree on a system for regulating carbon dioxide.

"Urgency has been diminished," said Chris Lafakis, an energy economist for Moody's Analytics.

Those same dollars might be better spent on building natural-gas-fired power plants, he said.

*"It's a very different kind of world we're looking at now," said Kenneth B. Medlock III, an energy economist at Rice University in Houston.*

One of the key differences is that Congress isn't close to an agreement about carbon regulation. As recently as 2008, many observers viewed such a deal as inevitable and those assumptions made carbon capture seem more feasible, he said.

Industry officials say clean-coal research is still very much alive. Southern Co. is testing a similar carbon-dioxide system at its Barry power plant in Alabama, said Revis James, director of the Electric Power Research Institute's Energy Technology Assessment Center.

"The stoppage of work at Mountaineer is not going to fundamentally change what we are going to do," James said, referring to the name of the AEP plant.

A new coal plant with carbon capture would cost $137 per megawatt-hour, according to the most-recent forecast from the Energy Information Administration. That is based on the estimated cost of construction and operation in 2016. The amount is more than double the cost from a gas-fired plant, which is $62.

Those numbers do not reflect the costs to modify plants such as Mountaineer.

AEP officials said the decision was tied to the sluggish economy and lingering uncertainty about federal energy policy. Spokesman Pat Hemlepp said the rising cost of carbon capture was not a significant factor, noting that "costs always rise" on construction projects




High costs bury AEP's carbon plan | The Columbus Dispatch

High costs bury AEP's carbon plan | The Columbus Dispatch


ANd go google the success of the northeast RGGI scam. Its in the toilet......a BS carbon reducing effort between states. Nobody cares about it in 2011.


And it leaves me laughing....................my ass off. Because all the OCD bozo's in here..........but especially Rolling Thunder..........think this shit is marching forward unabated because there is a consensus on the science.

And Sam's take on the k00ks insistence that they are winning???











PS........the operative word in the above article is????

How about............*seismic*


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 16, 2011)




----------



## daveman (Jul 16, 2011)

Chris said:


> Big Fitz said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...


Who has done that, and where?  Degree of difficulty:  You have to use their actual words, not the voices in your head.


----------



## Chris (Jul 16, 2011)

daveman said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > Big Fitz said:
> ...



Westwall.

Don't you feel silly insulting people you don't know on the internet?


----------



## Chris (Jul 16, 2011)

Record Events for Sat Jul 9, 2011 through Fri Jul 15, 2011 

High Temperatures: 477 
Low Temperatures: 151 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## ScienceRocks (Jul 16, 2011)

Peaked around 1999-2004 from the maximum of 23 and hit bottom in 2007-2010 for the long minimum that we have been in. .05 to .075c of temperature change.

2010 	0.62+.075=.695c 	
2005 	0.62+.01c=.63c 	
1998 	0.60+.01c=.61c 	
2003 	0.58 	
2002 	0.58 	
2009 	0.56+.05c=.61c 	or as high as .635c if you go with .075c
2006 	0.56+.033=.590c
2007 	0.55+.033=.585c 	
2004 	0.54 
2001 	0.52 	

So from 2007-2010 you need to add .033-.075c to each one of those temperatures compared to 1999-2004 period. 

2005-2006 I'd add .01 to .02c
1998 about the same

1988-1994=1999-2004
1994-1996=2007-2010

Do you think I did it right?


----------



## Big Fitz (Jul 16, 2011)

Chris said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...


your aim is pulling a little to the right.  Try again and hit the correct lane on the range.


----------



## ScienceRocks (Jul 16, 2011)

Here is the top ten when 1999-2004 solar output stays the same over the decade.


2010 .695c
2005 .63c
1998 .61c
2009 .61c(again I could of went to .635)
2006 .59c
2007 .585c
2003 .58c
2002 .58c
2004 .54c
2001 .52c

I totally threw out the rss data or anything that favored higher. A real warmer would of went with the rss!!!

Remember 2002, 2006, where fully nino years. 2002 into early 2003 where nino...

late 2007 through the mid part of 2009 where nina.

1999-2001 where nina, 2002 through first part of 2003 nino, 2004 is a mix bag, 2005 mix bag---I'd give it a slightly positive neutral. 2006 was above normal enso with a nino, 2007 the last part had a nina, 2008 you get the picture. 2009 started out within a nina, so at least to oct-nov time frame was under its effects. Nino started in the later part around August-sept time frame. The lag works both ways!

A full blown nina or nino events has -.25c to +.25c if the event is very strong. 1998 had .23+ for case in point. 2008 could of been close to -.15-.18c...Not totally sure.

2010 when you think about it honestly is much like 2005 in the way the enso worked.

2005 started out with a .3-.5c section 3.4, but after sept it went to about opposite of that...In away when you think about the way the lag works=2005 was a positive enso overall.

Same with 2010. You can have 1.8c nino for a month or two, but it was counter by a equal nina later. The lag makes sure it doesn't totally balance either, but goes alot like 2005.

It comes down to 1# solar cycle and 2# sulfur emissions to go into the missing warmth from 2005 to 2010.


----------



## ScienceRocks (Jul 16, 2011)

2010 .695c-.01c=.685c
2005 .63c-.01c=.62c
1998 .61c-.23c=.38
2009 .61c-.01c=.6c
2006 .59c-.05c=.54c
2007 .585c+.025c=.56c
2003 .58c-.025c=.555c
2002 .58c-.075c=.505
2004 .54c
2001 .52c+.05c=.525c
2008 .49c+.033c+.1=.625c


What it would looks like if solar stayed 1999-2004 and attempt at canceling some of the effects of the enso. Of course 

2010 .685c
2008 .625c
2005 .62c
2009 .6c
2007 .56c
2003 .55c 
2006 .54c
2004 .54c
2001 .525c
2002 .505c
1998 .38c+.025=.405c

I edited to lower 1998 as I made a mistake...But most likely the main reason is the fact NO powerful nina unlike 2010 countered the global temperatures. So warm temperatures could last throughout the year. 2005 didn't have this or even 2006. 
*


I will keep working on 1998...

O'hell I will keep working on the whole thing.

One more thing this doesn't account for the sulfur, which a negative forcing that has increased within the past 5 years.*


----------



## Chris (Jul 16, 2011)

Fiery reds and oranges nearly covered the United States on meteorologist maps as a massive heat wave hit hard in much of the country on Saturday.

Temperatures averaged up to 15 degrees above normal, with most peaks in the 90s but over-100-degree heat expected to strike from Montana to New Mexico, according to lead meteorologists for The Weather Channel and The National Weather Service.

The NWS issued excessive heat warnings and watches for the Midwest from Texas to Canada, and heat index values over 110 degrees are possible for portions of the central and eastern U.S. by the middle of next week.

Locations affected are expected to see temperatures and heat indexes of up to 117 degrees, including cities like Minneapolis where that is unusual.

Heat wave lingers, submerges U.S. in sizzling temperatures | Reuters


----------



## daveman (Jul 16, 2011)

Chris said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...


1.  Links.

2.  Provide proof he's paid to post on the internet.  If you can't do that, then your claim falls flat.


Chris said:


> Don't you feel silly insulting people you don't know on the internet?


Oh, no.  You provide more than adequate inspiration.  

Hey, we had some weather today.  It's global warming!!!


----------



## westwall (Jul 16, 2011)

Chris said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...







I don't need to insult people, you just insulted yourself by attributing a quote from Dave to me.  Good job, are you as observant as this when you wipe your bottom?   I hope not.



And for the record I worked for BP over 20 years ago for TWO years in their minerals exploration group.  Looking for gold, silver, and diamonds.  I have testified AGAINST them in court twice (as an expert witness) in the intervening years.  How about you chrissypoo?  Who's the shill here?  Why it's chrissypoo wanting the oil companies to make something for nothing!


----------



## Chris (Jul 16, 2011)

westwall said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > daveman said:
> ...



Thanks for proving my point.


----------



## Chris (Jul 16, 2011)

Already during July, 882 record high temperatures have been tied or set across the U.S. At the same time, drought is more extensive than any time since at least 2000. Over the weekend and next week, the drought will worsen in many areas while a remarkable burst of humid heat surges north and then east. 

The U.S. Drought Monitor released Thursday showed 29 percent of the country in drought, and 12 percent of the country in exceptional drought, the largest extent on record (though records only go back to 2000). 

Extreme heat wave to spread across U.S., drought conditions to worsen - Capital Weather Gang - The Washington Post


----------



## westwall (Jul 17, 2011)

Chris said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...







Proving what?  That I actually fight AGAINST BP?  You're the shill for the oil companies, not I.  I have fought against environmental abuse for 22 years.  What have you done?  Oh, that's right NOTHING!


----------



## gslack (Jul 17, 2011)

I just want to tell people that I have lost interest in debating chris and oldoscks. Oldsocks will lie incessantly when you catch him making a mistake or his sources turn out to be full of it. And chris does nothing but post random numbers, charts or graphs call them science and cry. Neither of them have any real understanding of any of it and neither of them will ever give up on their faith. So now I will only go for the quick laugh at their expense to entertain myself... SO in keeping my word here's a quote from one of the people bringing the scary climate change claims to us..

"We need to get some broad based support,
to capture the public's imagination...
So we have to offer up scary scenarios,
make simplified, dramatic statements
and make little mention of any doubts...
Each of us has to decide what the right balance
is between being effective and being honest."
- Prof. Stephen Schneider, 
Stanford Professor of Climatology,
lead author of many IPCC reports


----------



## Old Rocks (Jul 17, 2011)

LOL.  Yessiree.......   G, I certainly do cheat, I use sources such as USGS, NASA, NOAA, and many university sites, as well as sites from the world's leading scientific societies. 

Trouble with people like you, you prefer the world as it "ought to be" to the world as it is. You cannot face the reality of what we have created.


----------



## Old Rocks (Jul 17, 2011)

Westwall

Proving what? That I actually fight AGAINST BP? You're the shill for the oil companies, not I. I have fought against environmental abuse for 22 years. What have you done? Oh, that's right NOTHING! 

.....................................................................................................................

Sure, Walleyes, sure. That is why you are the first to defend the polluters. You past posts are proof of that. 

You denigrate the scientists of the AGU and the GSA, and then claim to be a geologist. LOL


----------



## Big Fitz (Jul 17, 2011)

westwall said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > daveman said:
> ...


He has good intentions West.  Time for a lot of us to throw him in the shit heap with Ole Crocks, and ignore his hysterical rantings and non-scientific foaming.


----------



## Chris (Jul 17, 2011)

Record Events for Sun Jul 10, 2011 through Sat Jul 16, 2011 

High Temperatures: 445 
Low Temperatures: 126 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## westwall (Jul 17, 2011)

Old Rocks said:


> Westwall
> 
> Proving what? That I actually fight AGAINST BP? You're the shill for the oil companies, not I. I have fought against environmental abuse for 22 years. What have you done? Oh, that's right NOTHING!
> 
> ...







Please post a link to any statement I have made in support of people or companies who pollute.  You're the only person on this board I know of who works for a gross polluting company so when it comes to a shill for polluting companies you're the ONE!


----------



## westwall (Jul 17, 2011)

Big Fitz said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...








If you say so.  I personally don't think his intentions are good.  I think he is at best a shill for the likes of Goldman Sachs and stands to make a bunch of cash if his dream laws ever get passed, or he's a true anti human loon.


----------



## boedicca (Jul 17, 2011)

Another colder than average day Oaklandtown.  9 degrees below the daily average; 35 degrees below the record high. It's pretty much like this every day.


----------



## westwall (Jul 17, 2011)

boedicca said:


> Another colder than average day Oaklandtown.  9 degrees below the daily average; 35 degrees below the record high. It's pretty much like this every day.







Yep, 15 degrees below normal here too.


----------



## IanC (Jul 17, 2011)

Vancouver BC has earned its reputation for cold rainy weather this year. and the interior has been just as bad.


----------



## Chris (Jul 17, 2011)

Fiery reds and oranges nearly covered the United States on meteorologist maps as a massive heat wave hit hard in much of the country on Saturday.

Temperatures averaged up to 15 degrees above normal, with most peaks in the 90s but over-100-degree heat expected to strike from Montana to New Mexico, according to lead meteorologists for The Weather Channel and The National Weather Service.

The NWS issued excessive heat warnings and watches for the Midwest from Texas to Canada, and heat index values over 110 degrees are possible for portions of the central and eastern U.S. by the middle of next week.

Locations affected are expected to see temperatures and heat indexes of up to 117 degrees, including cities like Minneapolis where that is unusual.

"The stage is being set for a massive heat wave to develop," the National Weather service had warned on Thursday.

Heat wave lingers, submerges U.S. in sizzling temperatures | Reuters


----------



## gslack (Jul 17, 2011)

Old Rocks said:


> LOL.  Yessiree.......   G, I certainly do cheat, I use sources such as USGS, NASA, NOAA, and many university sites, as well as sites from the world's leading scientific societies.
> 
> Trouble with people like you, you prefer the world as it "ought to be" to the world as it is. You cannot face the reality of what we have created.



I didn't say you cheat. I said you lie....

Kind of like what you just did liar...

Thanks for the confirmation.


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 17, 2011)

gslack bro.........the more BS they pull, the more I double down. And we have the distinct advantage of knowing that they think that there is no correlation between the science and political/economic realities in 2011........some kind of right/left brain fcukk up.
Where it counts is over time on these threads.......think about it.

First off......these people will go in the box being true believers. There is zero alternative data that can ever be posted by anybody thats going to change that. You're talking about decades of damage in some of these cases. They despise capitalism. They hate their own country. They loath anybody who is successful. They implicitly trust the government. That is at the root of their thinkiing. The science is secondary. The whole green movement is about global redistribution of wealth leading to worldwide socialism.

But heres the thing..........all their science crap is becomming irrelevant due to economic realities. Their science becomes relevant only when the economy is strong and people arent worrying about their fiscal future. People can afford to be idealistic as they are much more open to public policy geared towards the environment. For most of the last decade, that worked. Now? The only people thinking it is a good idea to have the government spending big $$ on alternative energy is the MAYBE 10% of the country that has OCD about the environment. The politicians know that now......which is why nobody dare propose any kind of significant environmental legislation at all...........they'd get laughed out of the chamber. Sure there are a few representatiives who's consituency has a large % of radical k00ks and they throw up shit for show just to keep their seat........and the k00ks are happy as a pig in shit. Across the country as a whole.,.......its on nobodys radar. As a matter of fact, you are hearing far, far more talk about moving to cheaper more efficient ways of providing energy = fossil fuels. Just 3 years ago, the northeast started something called RGGI.........a carbon credit scam basd upon k00k alarmist hysteria........about 12 states involved from Maryland up to Maine. Back in early 2008, it looked like a shoe-in. In recent months, legislatures have been methodically giving it the heave-ho!!! NOBODY wants to see their electric rates double in this economy...........or any economy for that matter. Crap and Tax is permanently in the shit house. All around the country, you are starting to see articles in newspapers and magazines like this..................

Everything you've heard about fossil fuels may be wrong - War Room - Salon.com


..........because the era of big government schemes is fast coming to an end because it is not at all affordable. Not even close. Even the UN is realizing this hysterical effort for the last 20 years is spinning its wheels.......and is going public. Last week's release of the
"76 trillion dollar to go green" memo  is a shot across the bow. Most of the k00ks wont have been paying attention but it is highly significant. They know that now isnt the time..........at all. They know that, particularly in the US, the push will be for affordable energy, not energy sources based upon schemes that fleece the taxpayer. In this climate..........its a loser approach with 100% certainty fAiL. The UN also see's the political realities: the US House of Representatives will be staying GOP for a minimum of 6 years and most estimates put it closer to ten years and perhaps beyond. In other words..........the climate sucks for wealth redistribution idea's. ( no pun intended). 


Its all good gslack bro...........why do you think I increasingly have a fcukking hoot in this forum? Its because all the stuff posted up by you, wire, Ian, Frank, Daveman et. al. = winning. ANd for people cheking iin on this forum to get a sense of the science will realize...............and ask themselves ( and IM talking random people who arent hyper-science heads)........"Hmmm............if the science was such a 'consensus', why is there no sense of urgency here like the alarmists promote?". These people will make the connection..........and thats all I give a rats ass about. To........over the course of a year.........have 3 or 4 people come in here and leave knowing this global warming stuff is and has always been a HUGE -ASS scam.


Its all good.............


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 17, 2011)

gslack.........I post up alot of these gay MSPAINT Photobucket gems.......but perhaps none is more spot on then this one........









Indeed gslack...........the time of the bomb throwers is fading away. Because nobody gives a rats ass about the hysterical shit anymore. There are a multitude of concerns for people that are far, far more pronounced.

and so it is............


----------



## Chris (Jul 17, 2011)

A heat alert continues Sunday as skyrocketing temperatures hit a record-breaking high in Toronto.

The daytime high reached a sweltering 34.6 C with a UV index of 10, or very high. The previous record for July 16 was set in 2002 at 34.4 C.

Sunday night will gradually become overcast, with a 40 per cent chance of rain and the chance of a thunderstorm before morning.

Toronto&#8217;s Medical Officer of Health first issued the alert Saturday morning.

The normal temperature for this time of year is 27 C, Environment Canada says.

Record-breaking temperatures in Toronto, heat alert continues - thestar.com


----------



## ScienceRocks (Jul 17, 2011)

It is the coldest fucking July ever in Portland Oregon. It has rained hard all day today!


----------



## Chris (Jul 17, 2011)

Heat Wave In Central US Shows No Signs Of Ending
by The Associated Press

As temperatures climbed into the 90s Sunday in Steele, N.D., a small window air conditioner in Paul and Betty Smokov's ranch home just couldn't keep up.

"It's 82 in the house," Betty Smokov said. "The heat is really oppressive and sticky."

That observation could be made anywhere in the central U.S. Heat advisories and warnings were in place in 17 states, from Texas to Michigan, as temperatures and humidity combined to make being outside uncomfortable for millions. One National Weather Service forecaster called the heat wave "unrelenting" and said sweaty residents shouldn't expect any relief soon: A so-called "heat dome" over the region isn't moving much.

"The trend is not our friend right now," said Daryl Williams, a forecaster in Norman.

In Oklahoma City, forecasters expected another day of 100-degree heat Sunday, which would be the 27th day this year the city has reached 100 or above. The city is on pace to break its record for such days &#8212; 50 set in 1980 &#8212; with triple-digit heat possible through September.

It's even worse in western Oklahoma, where temperatures at 110 or above have been common in recent weeks. In Enid, asphalt at a major intersection along U.S. Highway 412 buckled Saturday night from the intense heat.

Heat Wave In Central US Shows No Signs Of Ending : NPR


----------



## ScienceRocks (Jul 17, 2011)

This is what I was talking about westwall a few months ago. The warmer the temperature=more moisture it can hold. So yes a warmer antarctic=more snow! It has to be 32 or below and no place outside of maybe the thin part that sticks out ever gets there. The core of Antarctica never gets above 10f. You could raise the avg temp of the core of that place 5c or maybe 10c and get growing glaciers, while the sides would be melting faster then the growing glacial pushing out of the core..


This is what is kind of going on within Greenland...If you believe in the grace data.


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 17, 2011)

Its always hotter in some places............colder in some spots. Thats weather.........just depends on the year.

I was at the ocean this evening with my kids. Driving home, had to put up the windows. Reached 90 today but our evenings have been unusually cool by the account of many........and its mid-July already!! Nothing above 90 degrees yet..........highly odd.........not to mention that we literally froze our asses off in New York until mid-May following a winter nobody wants to remember. Meanwhile, Matthews balls are frozen and its mid summer in Oregon. 

Weve had weird weather in the middle of the country all year due to the outgoing LaNina. Every weather man in existence has talked about it. The k00ks get hysterical every single time there is a heat wave someplace............and its been that way as long as I can remember. These people are like storm chasers who get a rise out of fcukked up weather but who dont have the balls to go out and chase storms. They do it from in front of their PC = not winniing.


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 17, 2011)

Just in case anybody missed this post of genius from the last page................






The more BS the k00ks pull, the more I double down. And we have the distinct advantage of knowing that they think that there is no correlation between the science and political/economic realities in 2011........some kind of right/left brain fcukk up.
Where it counts is over time on these threads.......think about it.

First off......these people will go in the box being true believers. There is zero alternative data that can ever be posted by anybody thats going to change that. You're talking about decades of damage in some of these cases. They despise capitalism. They hate their own country. They loath anybody who is successful. They implicitly trust the government. That is at the root of their thinkiing. The science is secondary. The whole green movement is about global redistribution of wealth leading to worldwide socialism.

But heres the thing..........all their science crap is becomming irrelevant due to economic realities. Their science becomes relevant only when the economy is strong and people arent worrying about their fiscal future. People can afford to be idealistic as they are much more open to public policy geared towards the environment. For most of the last decade, that worked. Now? The only people thinking it is a good idea to have the government spending big $$ on alternative energy is the MAYBE 10% of the country that has OCD about the environment. The politicians know that now......which is why nobody dare propose any kind of significant environmental legislation at all...........they'd get laughed out of the chamber. Sure there are a few representatiives who's consituency has a large % of radical k00ks and they throw up shit for show just to keep their seat........and the k00ks are happy as a pig in shit. Across the country as a whole.,.......its on nobodys radar. As a matter of fact, you are hearing far, far more talk about moving to cheaper more efficient ways of providing energy = fossil fuels. Just 3 years ago, the northeast started something called RGGI.........a carbon credit scam basd upon k00k alarmist hysteria........about 12 states involved from Maryland up to Maine. Back in early 2008, it looked like a shoe-in. In recent months, legislatures have been methodically giving it the heave-ho!!! NOBODY wants to see their electric rates double in this economy...........or any economy for that matter. Crap and Tax is permanently in the shit house. All around the country, you are starting to see articles in newspapers and magazines like this..................

http://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_room/2011/05/31/linbd_fossil_fuels

..........because the era of big government schemes is fast coming to an end because it is not at all affordable. Not even close. Even the UN is realizing this hysterical effort for the last 20 years is spinning its wheels.......and is going public. Last week's release of the
"76 trillion dollar to go green" memo is a shot across the bow. Most of the k00ks wont have been paying attention but it is highly significant. They know that now isnt the time..........at all. They know that, particularly in the US, the push will be for affordable energy, not energy sources based upon schemes that fleece the taxpayer. In this climate..........its a loser approach with 100% certainty fAiL. The UN also see's the political realities: the US House of Representatives will be staying GOP for a minimum of 6 years and most estimates put it closer to ten years and perhaps beyond. In other words..........the climate sucks for wealth redistribution idea's. ( no pun intended). 


Its all good gslack bro...........why do you think I increasingly have a fcukking hoot in this forum? Its because all the stuff posted up by you, wire, Ian, Frank, Daveman et. al. = winning. ANd for people cheking iin on this forum to get a sense of the science will realize...............and ask themselves ( and IM talking random people who arent hyper-science heads)........"Hmmm............if the science was such a 'consensus', why is there no sense of urgency here like the alarmists promote?". These people will make the connection..........and thats all I give a rats ass about. To........over the course of a year.........have 3 or 4 people come in here and leave knowing this global warming stuff is and has always been a HUGE -ASS scam.


Its all good.............


----------



## Chris (Jul 17, 2011)

Worst heatwave in years grips Midwest, moving east...

An oppressive and potentially deadly summertime mix of sizzling temperatures and high humidity baked a large swath of the country again on Sunday, pushing afternoon heat indexes in dozens of cities to dangerous levels.

Forecasters warned the heatwave would persist through much of the coming week and cautioned residents in more than three dozen states to take extra precautions.

The National Weather Service posted excessive heat warnings for much of the country's midsection, including Illinois, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, Missouri, Kansas, Nebraska, Oklahoma, as well as South and North Dakota, where forecasters predicted heat indexes could hit 115 degrees.

"This will likely be the most significant heat wave the region has experienced in at least the last five years," the weather service said.

Worst heatwave in years grips Midwest, moving east | Reuters


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 18, 2011)

*Worst heatwave in years grips Midwest, moving east*By James B. Kelleher

CHICAGO | Sun Jul 17, 2011 2:13pm EDT 

CHICAGO (Reuters) - An oppressive and potentially deadly summertime mix of sizzling temperatures and high humidity baked a large swath of the country again on Sunday, pushing afternoon heat indexes in dozens of cities to dangerous levels.

Forecasters warned the heatwave would persist through much of the coming week and cautioned residents in more than three dozen states to take extra precautions.

The National Weather Service posted excessive heat warnings for much of the country's midsection, including Illinois, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, Missouri, Kansas, Nebraska, Oklahoma, as well as South and North Dakota, where forecasters predicted heat indexes could hit 115 degrees.

*"This will likely be the most significant heat wave the region has experienced in at least the last five years," the weather service said.*

Worst heatwave in years grips Midwest, moving east | Reuters






The k00ks want you to think this has never happened before.


----------



## Old Rocks (Jul 18, 2011)

Hmmm........    Very hot summer for most of the US. In a year that started with a record La Nina. The Missouri and Mississippi flooded from the headwaters to the Gulf. Since May. And, unless we get more rain, until mid-September. With more rain, possibly into winter. Very bad tornado season. Very rapid Arctic Ocean melt, and the Antarctic is not doing the norm, into very negative numbers. But nothing the worry about, our local Kook assures us. Someday, he may decide to join us on this planet.


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Jul 18, 2011)

Old Rocks said:


> Hmmm........    Very hot summer for most of the US. In a year that started with a record La Nina. The Missouri and Mississippi flooded from the headwaters to the Gulf. Since May. And, unless we get more rain, until mid-September. With more rain, possibly into winter. Very bad tornado season. Very rapid Arctic Ocean melt, and the Antarctic is not doing the norm, into very negative numbers. But nothing the worry about, our local Kook assures us. Someday, he may decide to join us on this planet.



Weren't you the guy who said that weather in USA does not count as Global because it was a local event?


----------



## daveman (Jul 18, 2011)

CrusaderFrank said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> > Hmmm........    Very hot summer for most of the US. In a year that started with a record La Nina. The Missouri and Mississippi flooded from the headwaters to the Gulf. Since May. And, unless we get more rain, until mid-September. With more rain, possibly into winter. Very bad tornado season. Very rapid Arctic Ocean melt, and the Antarctic is not doing the norm, into very negative numbers. But nothing the worry about, our local Kook assures us. Someday, he may decide to join us on this planet.
> ...


It does when he can claim it's caused by global warming.  

Obviously, world socialism is the only thing that will save us.

Right, Roxy?


----------



## Muhammed (Jul 18, 2011)

Global warming nazi's are just typical of all other nazis and commie dupes. 

They are idiots.

Even after the climategate leak they still cling on to their idiotic superstitious beliefs.


----------



## Chris (Jul 18, 2011)

Record Events for Mon Jul 11, 2011 through Sun Jul 17, 2011 

High Temperatures: 396 
Low Temperatures: 140 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Jul 18, 2011)

Chris said:


> Record Events for Mon Jul 11, 2011 through Sun Jul 17, 2011
> 
> High Temperatures: 396
> Low Temperatures: 140
> ...



140 low temp? in summer? what happened to global warming? Do we need to leave our cars running at night to prevent a new Ice Age?


----------



## boedicca (Jul 18, 2011)

Oh noooeesssss!!!!!11!!!!! GLOBAL WARMING IS REAL!

It's 2 degrees above the average for today (although still 16 degrees below the record high).

We're All Gonna DIE!


----------



## Chris (Jul 18, 2011)

(CNN) -- Much of middle America baked in a heat wave Sunday, with little respite in sight for Monday as temperatures and humidity are expected to make it feel warmer than 100 degrees Fahrenheit through much of this week.

Excessive heat warnings have been declared by the National Weather Service in at least 14 states, most of those in the upper Midwest. Excessive heat watches were in place in Indiana and Kentucky, with heat advisories (the least imminent of the three) in effect for four other states.

Several daily temperature records were broken Sunday -- from Alpena, Michigan, south to Miami, Florida.

"This is the hottest it's been for the longest period of time," said Emily McNamara from Sioux Falls, South Dakota, where the temperatures were expected to hover in the mid-90s through the middle of the week.

With no end in sight, record heat to move east - CNN.com


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 18, 2011)

Old Rocks said:


> Hmmm........    Very hot summer for most of the US. In a year that started with a record La Nina. The Missouri and Mississippi flooded from the headwaters to the Gulf. Since May. And, unless we get more rain, until mid-September. With more rain, possibly into winter. Very bad tornado season. Very rapid Arctic Ocean melt, and the Antarctic is not doing the norm, into very negative numbers. But nothing the worry about, our local Kook assures us. Someday, he may decide to join us on this planet.




Hey......what can I say? I guess Ive been conditioned via life experience not to get hysterical about everything thats out of the norm. I work in a field where life and death decisions have to be made every single day. Ive been at the death beds of dozens. Had people die in my arms after trying to revive them. I exist in a world where tragedy is part of every single day..........parents of disabled people who die of incomprehensible tragedies, curled up on the floor of the ER trauma room as the doctors pull the sheet over their sons head and Im sitting on the floor next to them.

 Pardon me if I dont have a mental meltdown every time the thermometer goes up a few degrees.


When people exist in fields where tradedy is defined by a paper cut that requires first aid, of course weather and weather related events are going to make these types hysterical at the drop of a hat. Most people say, "meh".

And since I am part of what represents the majority in this country, I'll stick to my own planet thanks..........



This forum is loaded with a bunch of hyper-hysterical panty waistes, by the way.............


----------



## RollingThunder (Jul 18, 2011)

CrusaderFrank said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> > Hmmm........    Very hot summer for most of the US. In a year that started with a record La Nina. The Missouri and Mississippi flooded from the headwaters to the Gulf. Since May. And, unless we get more rain, until mid-September. With more rain, possibly into winter. Very bad tornado season. Very rapid Arctic Ocean melt, and the Antarctic is not doing the norm, into very negative numbers. But nothing the worry about, our local Kook assures us. Someday, he may decide to join us on this planet.
> ...



Who said it's not global?





_Figure 1. Departure of temperature from average in June 2011. Image credit: National Climatic Data Center (NCDC)._



*Woman dies, ambassador collapses as heat wave hits eastern Europe*
July 14, 2011
(excerpts)

*BANJA LUKA, Bosnia-Herzegovina (AP)  A heat wave in Eastern Europe caused its first fatality on Thursday when a woman who had sought treatment at a hospital in Bosnia collapsed in its emergency room, a doctor said.

In Romania, France's ambassador fainted while giving a speech at his embassy.

In Bosnia, temperatures soared as high as 45 degrees Celsius (113 Fahrenheit), causing asphalt to begin melting in the southern city of Mostar.
*
***


*Europe heat wave sparks surge in grain prices*
Monday, 18 July 2011
(excerpts)

*Surging European grain prices following a scorching heat wave in recent weeks are likely to raise flour prices, and farmers are facing higher bills for animal feed, industry executives and analysts said. But some analysts say they doubt whether recent price rises are sustainable in view of large global grain stocks and the fact that overall grain supplies are currently still satisfactory.European grain prices have jumped around 25% in the past three weeks as hot weather and drought have hit crops just before harvesting in Western and Eastern Europe. "The heat wave has left a lot of fields looking more like Africa rather than European meadows," one grain trader said.*

***

*Heat wave sweeps Xinjiang, NW China*
Reuters
July 12, 2011 
(excerpts)

*A heat wave is sweeping the Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region in Northwest China as the local temperature is to peak above 37 degrees Celsius from Tuesday to Wednesday, with some places recording 40 degrees Celsius, according to the regional meteorological observatory.

The observatory issued an orange heat warning at 07:00 on Tuesday morning about the summer heat. Temperatures in some basin areas would be higher than 45 degrees Celsius.*

***

*Heat wave causes health concerns in Japan*
July 10, 2011 
(excerpts)

*TOKYO, July 10 (UPI) -- Japanese officials have warned residents not to cut back too much on the use of air conditioning, especially for older people and young children. Officials said the temperatures in Japan have risen higher than they have in decades amid a nationwide power-saving drive.

Nearly 7,000 people were hospitalized for heatstroke in June, more than three times the number from a year ago. Fifteen died after reaching the hospital.

Weather officials said June's heatwave sent temperatures in parts of Japan to their highest levels since 1961. Temperatures in downtown Tokyo reached 95 degrees on June 29 -- just the third time the temperature has exceeded 95 degrees in June since the Meteorological Agency began compiling comparable records in 1875.*

***

*Heat wave hits Italy, Serbia, Hungary, Romania and Greece*
July 14th, 2011
(excerpt)

*Parts of Europe experience temperatures of 40 degrees Celsius (104 degrees F).*


----------



## Old Rocks (Jul 18, 2011)

Going to be interesting to see what the map looks like for July.


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 18, 2011)

Old Rocks said:


> Going to be interesting to see what the map looks like for July.




only interesting to the k00ks..............


HOLY MOTHER OF GOD..........these people are chomping at the bit waiting for these temperatures graphs like an 8 year old waiting for the mailman to deliver a Batman whistle-ring decoder kit. Some fascinating shit............


----------



## gslack (Jul 18, 2011)

RollingThunder said:


> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> > Old Rocks said:
> ...



AHHHHH!

OMG!!! Temperature IS CLIMATE NOW!!!!!!!! RUN TO THE HILLS!!!!!


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 18, 2011)

Hey gslack bro..........appropo or what?


----------



## gslack (Jul 18, 2011)

skookerasbil said:


> Hey gslack bro..........appropo or what?



LOL priceless bro, priceless!


----------



## Chris (Jul 18, 2011)

RollingThunder said:


> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> > Old Rocks said:
> ...



That's actually quite a remarkable list.

Our climate is changing rapidly, and there are some powerful feedbacks that will kick in such as the melting ice cap and melting permafrost as time goes on.

All this with the Sun at its lowest level of activity in 80 years.


----------



## LoVE (Jul 19, 2011)

cry me a freaking river,  I live in the High desert of Colorado, when I was a kid 50 years ago the summer got so hot you could fry an egg on the hood of a car, July and august were notorious for 105 to 110 degrees.. and guess what.. it still gets the same temperature today as it did 50 years ago.. this is nothing more than fearmongering to separate you from your dollar. you cannot and will not ever control the weather or the climate on a planet, all you can do is throw money at it and fail


----------



## Patrick2 (Jul 19, 2011)

Cold out here on the west coast.

Cold some places, hot some places.

Yawwwwwwwwwwwwnnnnnnnnnnnnnn


----------



## ScienceRocks (Jul 19, 2011)

To love and patrick

Caused by a death ridge over the midwest at 500 millibars. On each side of a ridge there is normally a "trough" a trough is a dip within the jet stream with the cooler air to the north of the jet stream...So imagine the midwest is within a intense ridge with record hot and dry weather, but the west coast is within the cold and rainy crap. One of the coldest for Portland in the past 70 years so far.  Lets think about the ridge as divergence at the surface, which pretty much means the air is moving inwards at the upper levels 200-300 millibars, but moving outwards as it moves to 500 to 1013 millibars. What this does is increase the pressure of the column of air and that rises the pressure.  This also does the opposite of the air within a area of low pressure. Air within the northern side of the jet stream normally favors low pressure area's and is cooler as said above. Low pressure moves inward and warm moist air raises into the Atmosphere and cools towards its dew point--->this is what we call condensation once it cools to that.  Clouds and rainy weather. The air raising from the surface to the 25-40 thousand feet is why a low pressure is called a low pressure, and is why it lowers the pressure as the column of air is now pressing down less pressure onto the surface.

A low pressure of 992 millibars is causing 9,920 bars of pressure on the surface, but a high could cause 1020 millibars or 10,200 bars onto that surface.  In yes that is a difference of air pressure pressing onto the surface.

Not really so much climate when you think about the day to day, but imagine for a second that the above avg area's are above normal, but cover a larger area of the earth and of course your going to get below normal area's at the same time---the earth is not uniform my friends...It really is how you avg it out is how you get a idea of what changes a change climate may of had. Europe and the east coast last winter was very cold, but the arctic was 10-15c warmer then normal at the same time. Much of northern russia to was warmer if I remember...

*Lets look at this in another way...*

You have 10,526,000 sq miles of .5c above normal
You have 6,546,456 sq miles at -.5c above normal
Yes this is very simple, but lets say for a second that those two made up the surface area of the earth...You would have a above normal global avg!

Portland can be colder, but a larger percentage of the United states has been above normal so far this summer season---In I agree it is one of the coldest summers I've seen.

...
When you increase the "heat" you also increase the cold anomalies, but the heat or above avg is larger in scale then the cold anomalies. Weather being that the jet stream and weather systems will still spin around our globe, but the droughts and rainfalls will increase. 

That might go over your heads being that you might think, wow shit, if you have more rainfall shouldn't there be NO droughts? But remember the patterns of the jet stream and ridges and troughs will remain(weather) and occur. You will get ridges of high pressure that sit for months on end with that hotter drier air. Doing what you see in Texas and of course you will have on the sides area's of unseasonable cold and rainy weather. 

The air will be able to hold more moisture as you increase the temperature too. One case in point is the difference between Antarctica being only a fraction .1grams/volume of air for a dew point(constate) at maybe -30c to a area like Portland that is around 50f that holds like 4-5grams/volume of air for the same. So more extreme rains when and where your not dealing with a super ridge of high pressure!


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 19, 2011)

Yesterday was the first hot day in New York this YEAR. WTF.....its almost August??!!

Its like I said above.......some people's baseline for hysteria is real low. WHo can explain it? I have a brother in-law who freaks out at the mere sight of a spider...........guy practices martial arts every day yet runs for the hills in the presence of an anachra = damage. We all know mothers of small children who get mental about thier kids environment and dive across the table if a kid starts coughing when eating = damage. The people in the store buying two weeks worth of food when an Alberta Clipper snowstorm hits the weather maps = damage.

Its the same thing with these people who get over the top every time there is a weather anomoly, anomolies which have been happening for billions of years, by the way. Perhaps seeing the Wizard of Oz at a young age left them traumatized..........the tornado lifting the house into the air? A dropped ice cream cone as a kid melting quickly on the asphalt in the summer heat? Watching a parent freak out at a young age due to a thunder boom? Thats how shit like this happens...........a conditioned response of hysteria to events that to most people are everyday occurrences. There is some damage there folks..........

These people are environmental extremists. Many of the things advocated by environmental extremists, for example, are things that most of us might think of as good things. But, in politics, they become good ghings whose repercussions and costs are brushed aside as unworthy considerations. Nobody wants to breathe dirty air or drink dirty water, however,  if either becomes 98 percent pure, 99 percent pure or 99.9 percent pure, there is some point beyond which the costs skyrocket and the benefits become meager or non-existent. If the slightest trace of any impurity were fatal, the human race would have become extinct thousands of years ago. Not only does the body have defenses to neutralize small amounts of some impurities, some things that are dangerous, or even fatal, in substantial amounts can become harmless or even beneficial in extremely minute amounts, arsenic being one example. As an old adage put it: "It is the dose that makes the poison.". Obviously, removing arsenic from our drinking water should obviously be a very high priority -- but not after we have gotten it down to some extremely minute trace. There is never going to be 100 percent clean water or air and, the closer we get to that, the more costly it is to remove extremely minute traces of anything. But none of this matters to those who see ever higher standards of "clean water" or "clean air" as a good thing = damage.

The perception of the environment as assessed by these k00ks is simply over the top........and funny.........even if what they advocate as AGW truth could be proven beyond the shadow of a doubt, the thought that our race could actually do something about it and have any significant impact given socio-economic realities speaks even more to significant damage.

Anyway........perhaps most concerning is this insistence of the environmental radicals to continue with this alarmist strategy which is crashing and burning right before their eyes...........and their response is to go from alarmist to hyper-alarmist to armagheddon bomb-thrower alarmist. YIKES..........


----------



## RollingThunder (Jul 19, 2011)

If the world wasn't undergoing rapid forced climate changes, the ratio of record hot days to record cold days would naturally tend to be about 1:1. Because the world *is* experiencing abrupt anthropogenic warming, the ratio of record hot days to record cold days has been growing in recent years to two or even three times as many record hot days as record cold days. This last June was exceptional and demonstrates just how skewed our climate patterns are getting.

*June Record High Temperatures Beat Record Lows 11-to-1 in US*
 07. 8. 11
(excerpts)

*According to new data from NOAA's National Climatic Data Center, there were 2706 new record high temperatures set in June versus 251 new record low temperatures.

That's a ratio of nearly 11:1, when the expected ratio over time should be about 1:1. On a yearly basis over the past decade the ratio has been about 2:1, with data showing that part of the issue is that nights aren't cooling as much as they used to.

From the 1950s to 1980s the ratio fluctuated between being slightly above and slightly below 1:1, but since the 80s it began increasing. Under a business-as-usual climate change scenario, we could hit 20:1 record highs to record lows by 2050 and even 50:1 by 2100. Should we successfully reduce emissions enough, by 2050 we may be able to constrain that ratio to 8:1.

In addition to those 2706 daily high temperature records, June say 63 all-June temperature records and 17 yearly high temperature records. *


----------



## gslack (Jul 19, 2011)

RollingThunder said:


> If the world wasn't undergoing rapid forced climate changes, the ratio of record hot days to record cold days would naturally tend to be about 1:1. Because the world *is* experiencing abrupt anthropogenic warming, the ratio of record hot days to record cold days has been growing in recent years to two or even three times as many record hot days as record cold days. This last June was exceptional and demonstrates just how skewed our climate patterns are getting.
> 
> *June Record High Temperatures Beat Record Lows 11-to-1 in US*
> 07. 8. 11
> ...



OMG!!!! We had more record highs than record lows in the middle of summer! Does this mean? Oh NO! Yes it must mean that its warmer this summer.. By the gods man! Does anyone else know?

Thanks for the info, so its a warm summer than got it... So let me know when you get a thousand of them in a row and we can start to claim climate change... LOL


----------



## RollingThunder (Jul 19, 2011)

gslack said:


> RollingThunder said:
> 
> 
> > If the world wasn't undergoing rapid forced climate changes, the ratio of record hot days to record cold days would naturally tend to be about 1:1. Because the world *is* experiencing abrupt anthropogenic warming, the ratio of record hot days to record cold days has been growing in recent years to two or even three times as many record hot days as record cold days. This last June was exceptional and demonstrates just how skewed our climate patterns are getting.
> ...



We can always count on the slackjawedidiot to contribute nothing but meaningless noise based solely on his non-comprehension and ignorance. 

In case there might by anyone fooled by his words into imagining that this is just a normal summer phenomenon, here's the data on the last six decades, all year, summer, fall, winter and spring.

*Record high temperatures far outpace record lows across U.S.
UCAR*
November 12, 2009
(excerpts)

*BOULDERSpurred by a warming climate, daily record high temperatures occurred twice as often as record lows over the last decade across the continental United States, new research shows. The ratio of record highs to lows is likely to increase dramatically in coming decades if emissions of greenhouse gases continue to climb. If temperatures were not warming, the number of record daily highs and lows being set each year would be approximately even. Instead, for the period from January 1, 2000, to September 30, 2009, the continental United States set 291,237 record highs and 142,420 record lows, as the country experienced unusually mild winter weather and intense summer heat waves.*





*This graphic shows the ratio of record daily highs to record daily lows observed at about 1,800 
weather stations in the 48 contiguous United States from January 1950 through September 2009. 
Each bar shows the proportion of record highs (red) to record lows (blue) for each decade. 
The 1960s and 1970s saw slightly more record daily lows than highs, but in the last 30 years record 
highs have increasingly predominated, with the ratio now about two-to-one for the 48 states as a whole. 
[ENLARGE] (©UCAR, graphic by Mike Shibao.)*


***


----------



## Old Rocks (Jul 20, 2011)

skookerasbil said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> > Hmmm........    Very hot summer for most of the US. In a year that started with a record La Nina. The Missouri and Mississippi flooded from the headwaters to the Gulf. Since May. And, unless we get more rain, until mid-September. With more rain, possibly into winter. Very bad tornado season. Very rapid Arctic Ocean melt, and the Antarctic is not doing the norm, into very negative numbers. But nothing the worry about, our local Kook assures us. Someday, he may decide to join us on this planet.
> ...



Sure fella. You are obviously a decorated Vietnam Vet and served in World War One as well.


----------



## Chris (Jul 20, 2011)

Record Events for Wed Jul 13, 2011 through Tue Jul 19, 2011 

High Temperatures: 305 
Low Temperatures: 160 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## Old Rocks (Jul 20, 2011)

LoVE said:


> cry me a freaking river,  I live in the High desert of Colorado, when I was a kid 50 years ago the summer got so hot you could fry an egg on the hood of a car, July and august were notorious for 105 to 110 degrees.. and guess what.. it still gets the same temperature today as it did 50 years ago.. this is nothing more than fearmongering to separate you from your dollar. you cannot and will not ever control the weather or the climate on a planet, all you can do is throw money at it and fail



Really trying to demonstrate what an idiot you trully are.

http://www.cier.umd.edu/climateadaptation/Climate change--COLORADO.pdf

During the last 50 years, Colorado has experienced rising temperatures, increased precipitation, and altered surface water flow as a result of climate change. The state
on the whole has warmed faster than the U.S. average,with more dramatic temperature increases seen at higher altitudes. Lower altitudes, including the states eastern
plains, also are seeing higher temperatures.1,2,3 Theaverage annual temperature at Fort Collins, located at 5,000 feet, has increased by 4.1º F, while the temperature in the Arkansas River Valleylocated at a much lowerelevationhas increased by only 0.5º F.4, 5 As climatechange continues during the next 100 years, Colorado is
likely to see higher temperatures and more precipitation in some regions, while water resources are likely to become less secure.6,7 At the highest elevations, winter and summer temperatures may increase by 5º F to 6º F, while spring and fall temperatures  could increase by 3º F to 4º F.


----------



## gslack (Jul 20, 2011)

RollingThunder said:


> gslack said:
> 
> 
> > RollingThunder said:
> ...



*OH NO!!!!!* Scary colored graphs!!! AHHHHHHHHH!!!!

yes, there were more record highs than in the previous 6 decades.. AND? Wait whats that?
The 60's and 70's were a lot lower.... Hmm hows that work if its been warming since the Industrial Revolution? Matter of fact those decades had a lot less record temps.... Hmmm 20 years with basically no warming right smack in the middle of the AGW monster?

Wait I said 20 years of no warming, and thats not right is it... I mean just because its not a record doesn't mean its not warming right?? Yeah thats right and just like that more record temps doesn't necessarily translate to warming either does it... Yeah tool ya just showed why I think you are an idiot who has no concept of any of this in any kind of realistic fashion. You cite studies and post what you see with no thought or anything. They say AGW and you say "why of course", like a good little drone.. LOL I feel sorry for anyone who can't think..


----------



## gslack (Jul 20, 2011)

Old Rocks said:


> LoVE said:
> 
> 
> > cry me a freaking river,  I live in the High desert of Colorado, when I was a kid 50 years ago the summer got so hot you could fry an egg on the hood of a car, July and august were notorious for 105 to 110 degrees.. and guess what.. it still gets the same temperature today as it did 50 years ago.. this is nothing more than fearmongering to separate you from your dollar. you cannot and will not ever control the weather or the climate on a planet, all you can do is throw money at it and fail
> ...



Yes post those studies until all doubt is erased... LOL

Once again you prove my point. You can't think at all for yourself can you...


----------



## Old Rocks (Jul 20, 2011)

Your point is that you have no studies that back up your idiocy. Because the climate is warming rapidly due to the burning of fossil fuels. 

Yes, I can post my personal observations of retreating glaciers in the Cascades and Rockies. But they are not scientific studies. So I post the studies done in that area by trained scientists.

NWMJ Issue 4 - Vanishing Glaciers

The Future
These observations make clear that retreat of North Cascade glaciers is rapid and ubiquitous. All 47 glaciers monitored by our project are currently undergoing a significant retreat or have disappeared altogether. Ongoing temperature rises combined with a reduction in snow accumulation in the North Cascades have resulted in widespread disequilibrium. Even the wet winter of 2007 yielded barely above-average snowpack in the mountains as more of that precipitation fell as rain.

The net loss over the last 20 years is a significant portion of the total glacier volume, estimated at 18 to 32 percent. Sadly, prevailing conditions provide little evidence that North Cascade glaciers are close to equilibrium. Their ongoing thinning indicates that all of the glaciers will continue to retreat into the foreseeable future.


----------



## gslack (Jul 20, 2011)

Old Rocks said:


> Your point is that you have no studies that back up your idiocy. Because the climate is warming rapidly due to the burning of fossil fuels.
> 
> Yes, I can post my personal observations of retreating glaciers in the Cascades and Rockies. But they are not scientific studies. So I post the studies done in that area by trained scientists.
> 
> ...



I'm sorry all I read was "Doom, Gloom, Despair," and got scared...


----------



## LoVE (Jul 20, 2011)

Old Rocks said:


> LoVE said:
> 
> 
> > cry me a freaking river,  I live in the High desert of Colorado, when I was a kid 50 years ago the summer got so hot you could fry an egg on the hood of a car, July and august were notorious for 105 to 110 degrees.. and guess what.. it still gets the same temperature today as it did 50 years ago.. this is nothing more than fearmongering to separate you from your dollar. you cannot and will not ever control the weather or the climate on a planet, all you can do is throw money at it and fail
> ...



 look pecker breath.

I live in the Arkansas valley and have for over 50 years.. and as your little article states the temp here has only fluctuated by .5 of a degree.. now if you would care to talk to me without calling me an idiot I won't call you pecker breath.. deal?


----------



## ScienceRocks (Jul 20, 2011)




----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 20, 2011)

Old Rocks said:


> Your point is that you have no studies that back up your idiocy. Because the climate is warming rapidly due to the burning of fossil fuels.












Actually s0n......the joke is on you. The fact is, there are studies on both sides and in recent years, and it is clear that the public thinks the studies of the "real scientists" might not be that real. People's radar goes up when shit starts getting manipulated, like temperature data and glacier melt predictions. They smell scam............








This obsession with fossil fuels may be an obsession for you s0n but its hardly a concern for people in the real world who are of the opinion that global warming is faaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaar from a priority. Thankfully........most people view their world as being one where decisions are made based upon weighing necessary tradeoffs. Far left guys are sorta deficient in that area of thinking, as the map above clearly displays.


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 20, 2011)

LoVE said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> > LoVE said:
> ...



LoVE..........you gotta make it a point to stop in hiere more often. This place is a hoot..........its become a source of bonifide entertainment for many of us at the expense of the k00ks. Whats more fun than getting an opportunity every day to respond to absurd stuff and publically humiliating people who get hysterical at the drop of a hat?


----------



## editec (Jul 20, 2011)

What does "Who's not winning" have to do with science?

Do you think the GLOBAL CLIMATE takes a poll to decide what it will do?


----------



## Old Rocks (Jul 20, 2011)

Editec, your first mistake is assuming that Kooky as the ability to think. No evidence of that has ever been demonstrated. 

There is, unfortunately, a bunch of people out there that seem to think that opinion can change the inevitable consequences of basic physics.


----------



## Old Rocks (Jul 20, 2011)

Matthew said:


>



Looks like Hansen and the rest have the models down pretty good. However, no matter what happens, the Denialists will claim that it is just normal weather. The events of the last 12 months have proven how far into their alternative universe they really are.


----------



## Chris (Jul 20, 2011)

Much of the Midwest suffered Monday with heat and high humidity that won't loosen their grip for days. More than 1,000 high-temperature records have been broken this month, Weather Channel meteorologist Mark Ressler said.

"Heat is very expansive from the Rockies right over to the East Coast, with the core of it in the middle of the country," he said. There were heat warnings, advisories or watches in 17 states Monday.

Record heat stretches from Rockies to East Coast - USATODAY.com


----------



## gslack (Jul 20, 2011)

*aaaaaahhhhhhhh!!!!!!*


----------



## RollingThunder (Jul 20, 2011)

gslack said:


> *aaaaaahhhhhhhh!!!!!!*



Thank you, slackjawedidiot, for once again demonstrating my point so clearly and succinctly....


RollingThunder said:


> We can always count on the slackjawedidiot to contribute nothing but meaningless noise based solely on his non-comprehension and ignorance.


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 20, 2011)

editec said:


> What does "Who's not winning" have to do with science?
> 
> Do you think the GLOBAL CLIMATE takes a poll to decide what it will do?




Ummm.........how about *everything* s0n!!!

Its posts like this that prove my point. Before you are allowed to post on this message board, you should have to show minimum competence in the area of Civics.

Now.......I guess there is a possiblitly that some view global climate as just like a hobby where you kick around data figures and shoot the shit about the heat and glaciers. IDK.......thats about as useful as us all getting together and contemplating on our navels = the perfect analogy.

Anyway........in some cases, making an effort at schooling the hoplessly naive is hardly worth it. For sure, Old Rocks knows exactly what I mean!!!


----------



## RollingThunder (Jul 20, 2011)

skookerasbil said:


> editec said:
> 
> 
> > What does "Who's not winning" have to do with science?
> ...



LOLOLOLOLOL....very funny watching you repeatedly demonstrate what a clueless retard you are, kooker.....LOLOL...


----------



## gslack (Jul 20, 2011)

RollingThunder said:


> gslack said:
> 
> 
> > *aaaaaahhhhhhhh!!!!!!*
> ...



No problem... 

Oh before I forget care to explain what exactly is NOT attributed to climate change? Seriously is there anything the climate can do that will not lead to your side claiming its evidence of climate change... I will wait...


----------



## Old Rocks (Jul 20, 2011)

Gstring, are you ever going to do anything but flap yap? How about posting something from a real scientist supporting your point of view. It is a scientific debate, after all.


----------



## gslack (Jul 20, 2011)

Old Rocks said:


> Gstring, are you ever going to do anything but flap yap? How about posting something from a real scientist supporting your point of view. It is a scientific debate, after all.



What no answer just a request for scientific evidence on it? LOL it was a question tool, answer it or don't but don't try and pull the science excuse out of your butt. Either you can answer it or you can't... LOL


----------



## Chris (Jul 21, 2011)

NEW YORK -- A lengthy, blistering heat wave that is blanketing the eastern half of the United States is putting significant stress on the nation's power grid as homeowners and businesses crank up their air conditioners.

It's going to be so hot that New York's power grid may be taxed like never before.

The New York Independent System Operator, the North Greenbush nonprofit that oversees the state's high-voltage transmission system, is predicting that the state's electrical grid could end up being loaded with more than 34,000 megawatts of power Thursday, which would surpass the previous peak load of 33,939 megawatts recorded on Aug. 2, 2006.

Different sort of heat-induced record possible - Times Union


----------



## Old Rocks (Jul 21, 2011)

If the system goes down, there will be a significant mortality associated with that failure.


----------



## daveman (Jul 21, 2011)

Chris said:


> NEW YORK -- A lengthy, blistering heat wave that is blanketing the eastern half of the United States is putting significant stress on the nation's power grid as homeowners and businesses crank up their air conditioners.
> 
> It's going to be so hot that New York's power grid may be taxed like never before.
> 
> ...



The obvious solution is, of course, shut down all coal-fired power plants.


----------



## Big Fitz (Jul 21, 2011)

gslack said:


> *aaaaaahhhhhhhh!!!!!!*


If yesterday the cooling haddn't started I was gonna have to start running people down with my bus.  Two days ago, I got on it, it was 108 inside.  Tied for the hottest I ever got on.

Now, it's low humidity and only gonna hit the middle 80's.  

We see hot snaps like this every 5-15 years.  So what?


----------



## Chris (Jul 21, 2011)

Record Temperatures In Canada: Hottest Day Ever?
by Jack Ryan

A heat alert is out in Canada. 16 records have already been broken making today possibly the hottest day in Canada's history.

In Toronto, the temperature has gotten up to 34.6 C with an UV index of 10. The forecast says that it will likely hit 38 C with a humidex of 48. The highest ever recorded temperature was 38.3 C on Aug. 25, 1948.

Record Temperatures In Canada: Hottest Day Ever?


----------



## ScienceRocks (Jul 21, 2011)

Sure area's are going to have record highs, but the skeptics are then going to say how they occurred in the past. Portland has had a week straight of 100 degree temperatures, but that doesn't really matter. Why because that was likely a once every 200 year event---a warming world would mean a 200 year event will become a 150 year a event and pretty soon become 100, 50, 25, 10, ect year event. That is of more importance. Once it gets down to just mere decades it becomes normal as the great floods within the United states, ect.

Remember the 1930-1940s were nearly as warm as today within the United states and records from that period will be challenged within this period. Yes I'm admitting that this period within the United states was as warm as today...As the 1960s, 1970s had a cooling within north America. 

What our friends the warmers are talking about is the global avg---I'm sure there is even places like the east antarctic ice sheet that has cooled in the past 50  years, but that doesn't really matter.


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 21, 2011)

RollingThunder said:


> skookerasbil said:
> 
> 
> > editec said:
> ...












Hmmm..........but notice. Im the retard, however, none of the alarmists can EVER post one SINGLE SOLITARY link from the last two years to show me where the warming situation is so dire, our representatives are falling all over themselves to do something about it.

Our representatives conduct is a highly accurate indicator on how much people care about issues effecting them. ( see suggestion for Civics lessons above) So.........if the science is such a slam dunk.........

*WHY IS THERE ZERO LEGISLATION s0n???*


Perhaps the genius here can provide a link??


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 21, 2011)




----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 21, 2011)




----------



## gslack (Jul 21, 2011)

Matthew said:


> Sure area's are going to have record highs, but the skeptics are then going to say how they occurred in the past. Portland has had a week straight of 100 degree temperatures, but that doesn't really matter. Why because that was likely a once every 200 year event---a warming world would mean a 200 year event will become a 150 year a event and pretty soon become 100, 50, 25, 10, ect year event. That is of more importance. Once it gets down to just mere decades it becomes normal as the great floods within the United states, ect.
> 
> Remember the 1930-1940s were nearly as warm as today within the United states and records from that period will be challenged within this period. Yes I'm admitting that this period within the United states was as warm as today...As the 1960s, 1970s had a cooling within north America.
> 
> What our friends the warmers are talking about is the global avg---I'm sure there is even places like the east antarctic ice sheet that has cooled in the past 50  years, but that doesn't really matter.



*" Portland has had a week straight of 100 degree temperatures,..." *

 You sure about that? Cause the NOAA and NWS paint a different picture...

National Weather Service - NWS Portland






Matter of fact if you look at the data chart under that graphic on the page, there is not one single record high for 2011 in the month of july yet.. Yep that is not one single record high despite a week straight of 100 degree temps... Or actually 60's, 70's, and a few 80's degree weather.... Care to explain this?

Just so you know I am not cherry picking or lying, here is another source..

Portland, Oregon, U.S.A. historic weather for the past week






Hmm, looks like a high of 78 to me for the last week so far... Matter of fact the last link has the temperature recorded pretty much on the hour for the last week and they don't show 100 degree temps at all...


----------



## ScienceRocks (Jul 21, 2011)

skookerasbil said:


> Yesterday was the first hot day in New York this YEAR. WTF.....its almost August??!!
> 
> Its like I said above.......some people's baseline for hysteria is real low. WHo can explain it? I have a brother in-law who freaks out at the mere sight of a spider...........guy practices martial arts every day yet runs for the hills in the presence of an anachra = damage. We all know mothers of small children who get mental about thier kids environment and dive across the table if a kid starts coughing when eating = damage. The people in the store buying two weeks worth of food when an Alberta Clipper snowstorm hits the weather maps = damage.
> 
> ...





gslack said:


> Matthew said:
> 
> 
> > Sure area's are going to have record highs, but the skeptics are then going to say how they occurred in the past. Portland has had a week straight of 100 degree temperatures, but that doesn't really matter. Why because that was likely a once every 200 year event---a warming world would mean a 200 year event will become a 150 year a event and pretty soon become 100, 50, 25, 10, ect year event. That is of more importance. Once it gets down to just mere decades it becomes normal as the great floods within the United states, ect.
> ...



I'm talking about the 1980 not this year. This year is cooler then hell.


----------



## gslack (Jul 21, 2011)

Matthew said:


> skookerasbil said:
> 
> 
> > Yesterday was the first hot day in New York this YEAR. WTF.....its almost August??!!
> ...



Might want to clarify that then cause you didn't mention the 80's in that sentence. Kinda hard to ascertain you meant the 80's in that first part. You mentioned other decades later on but not that decade...


----------



## Chris (Jul 21, 2011)

Record Events for Thu Jul 14, 2011 through Wed Jul 20, 2011 

High Temperatures: 430 
Low Temperatures: 173 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## percysunshine (Jul 21, 2011)

As soon as women start posting skimpy clothing pics in a global warming thread...the end is near.


----------



## ScienceRocks (Jul 22, 2011)

Here is channel 5 data from Amsu-A. 

Brown=2010
HOT pink=2011
Purple=2008
Yellow=2005

We're between 2010 and 2005 right now.


----------



## Chris (Jul 22, 2011)

Record Events for Fri Jul 15, 2011 through Thu Jul 21, 2011 

High Temperatures: 566 
Low Temperatures: 161 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## gslack (Jul 22, 2011)

Okay I am tired of this silly thread now. When it comes down to the two of you posting record temps and charts or graphs that have no real significance without a link to back them or some context, I know its done. Moving on you guys post your temps..LOL


----------



## Chris (Jul 22, 2011)

Record Events for Fri Jul 15, 2011 through Thu Jul 21, 2011 

High Temperatures: 578 
Low Temperatures: 164 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## Old Rocks (Jul 22, 2011)

Matthew said:


> Here is channel 5 data from Amsu-A.
> 
> Brown=2010
> HOT pink=2011
> ...



Advanced Microwave Sounding Unit-A (AMSU-A) Instrument Guide &mdash; GES DISC: Goddard Earth Sciences, Data & Information Services Center

Advanced Microwave Sounding Unit-A (AMSU-A) Instrument Guide 

Summary:
The AIRS/AMSU/HSB suite of instruments is flying on board of Aqua satellite, and thus their "overpass" pattern is this of Aqua.

The Advanced Microwave Sounding Unit-A (AMSU-A) is a multi-channel microwave temperature/humidity sounder that measures global atmospheric temperature profiles and provides information on atmospheric water in all of it's forms (with the exception of small ice particles, which are transparent at microwave frequencies). Information from AMSU-A in the presence of clouds is used to correct the infrared measurements for the effects of clouds. 

The AMSU-A instrument consists of two independent modules (AMSU-A1 and AMSU-A2), with each module having separate spacecraft interfaces. AMSU-A1 module uses two antenna-radiometer systems (A1-1 and A1-2) to provide twelve channels in the 50 to 60 GHz oxygen band for retrieving the atmospheric temperature profile from the Earth's surface to about 42 kilometers (or 2 mb). The AMSU-A1 module also contains a channel at 89 GHz, while AMSU-A2 has two channels at 23.8 and 31.4 GHz to identify precipitation and correct for surface emissivity, atmospheric liquid water, and water vapor effects. These window channels are also used to derive rain rate, sea ice concentration, and snow cover for example. 

The instrument is a direct descendant of the NOAA Microwave Sounding Unit (MSU). Although the basic measurement and instrument concepts are the same, the capabilities of AMSU-A exceed significantly those of MSU. The first AMSU-A instrument was launched, as part of the NOAA Advanced TOVS (ATOVS) system, on NOAA-K (now NOAA-15) in May 1998 providing operational heritage for the AIRS/AMSU-A/HSB mission. The AMSU-A instrument will also fly on the NOAA-L and -M satellites prior to the EOS AQUA launch.


----------



## gslack (Jul 23, 2011)

Old Rocks said:


> Matthew said:
> 
> 
> > Here is channel 5 data from Amsu-A.
> ...



No one cares what the device they use is oldsocks, and your attempts to mask the utterly ignorant things you say and do on here on a regular basis by googling up data and information to pump up your image Too funny for words now.. Please keep it up MENSA man ..


----------



## Care4all (Jul 23, 2011)

we broke some long time record highs today....

it is hotter than heck up here!  Shocking really!


----------



## editec (Jul 23, 2011)

Okay, I almost never say this but it was too damned HOT today.

That's probably why I am up in the middle of the night.  I went into a heat coma too early yesterday evening and woke up at 1 AM

EVen my "almost free air conditioning" system (drafting cool air up from my basement and jettisoning the house's hotter from the attic) system failed to keep my house cool today.

Usually even in the hottest days of summer, that would be enough to make the house comfortable.

Not today!


----------



## Old Rocks (Jul 23, 2011)

Now come on, people. G-string states that the heat is all in your imagination. The warming is not happening, all of that is just a 'liberal' hoax. 

A very warm hoax.


----------



## Old Rocks (Jul 23, 2011)

gslack said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> > Matthew said:
> ...



Yessirree.........   I cheat like hell, g-string. I quote real scientists. How demeaning.


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 23, 2011)

G-Strings FTMFW!!! Havent seen them in a dogs age here in New York until yesterday..........although not sure back in 1957 or 1931 they were really a part of the fashion culture.


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 23, 2011)

Old Rocks said:


> gslack said:
> 
> 
> > Old Rocks said:
> ...





right.............real scientists like the political hack Peter Gleick of the Pacific Insistute. A radical environmental think tank in California. Yup.........I saw those quotes earlier this AM.


Pacific Institute - SourceWatch


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 23, 2011)




----------



## editec (Jul 23, 2011)

skookerasbil said:


> editec said:
> 
> 
> > What does "Who's not winning" have to do with science?
> ...


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 23, 2011)

Your post makes no sense s0n.............no amount of explanation can help............


On Thought Process Disorder: see "loose associations" and "perseverative thinking".

Mental status examination - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## Chris (Jul 23, 2011)

Record Events for Sat Jul 16, 2011 through Fri Jul 22, 2011 

High Temperatures: 683 
Low Temperatures: 115 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Jul 23, 2011)

Temperature dropped 10 degrees today. Global cooling?  Has to be right? Was hot yesterday and that was because of Global Warming, so today has to be Global Cooling


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 23, 2011)

So.......has anybody identified the perseverative thinking forum member yet?







ps.......s0n.......you should check this shit out and Im not kidding. Miracle potential for a re-set of the setting screws and off the hampster wheel thinking. Its a serotonin uptake issue changed only via pharmacological aids......therapeutic range 150mg to 300mg.


----------



## boedicca (Jul 23, 2011)

Yet another day of cool temps in Oaklandtown.

Today's forecast is for 2 degrees below the average, and 30 degrees below the record.

Poor, cold tomato plants.


----------



## Chris (Jul 23, 2011)

At 3 p.m., the temperature in Central Park hit a chart-topping 104 degrees, blowing past the previous same-day record of 101 established in 1957&#8212;and another record of 102 degrees set earlier Friday, according to the National Weather Service. 

PSE&G said 20,000 customers in New Jersey lost power, though 5,000 of those were because of a storm in the afternoon, not the heat. Jersey Central Power & Light also reported failures throughout central and northwestern New Jersey, with 500 or fewer people affected in some towns, and between 5,000 and 10,000 people affected in Toms River. 

The mercury hit 108 in Newark, N.J, breaking both the same-day record of 101 set in 1957 and the all-time record of 105 that was hit on Aug. 9, 2001.

Record-High Heat Scorches Region - WSJ.com


----------



## daveman (Jul 23, 2011)

Chris said:


> At 3 p.m., the temperature in Central Park hit a chart-topping 104 degrees, blowing past the previous same-day record of 101 established in 1957and another record of 102 degrees set earlier Friday, according to the National Weather Service.
> 
> PSE&G said 20,000 customers in New Jersey lost power, though 5,000 of those were because of a storm in the afternoon, not the heat. Jersey Central Power & Light also reported failures throughout central and northwestern New Jersey, with 500 or fewer people affected in some towns, and between 5,000 and 10,000 people affected in Toms River.
> 
> ...



You know what would solve that power outage problem?  Shutting down all coal-fired power plants.


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Jul 23, 2011)

Chris said:


> At 3 p.m., the temperature in Central Park hit a chart-topping 104 degrees, blowing past the previous same-day record of 101 established in 1957and another record of 102 degrees set earlier Friday, according to the National Weather Service.
> 
> PSE&G said 20,000 customers in New Jersey lost power, though 5,000 of those were because of a storm in the afternoon, not the heat. Jersey Central Power & Light also reported failures throughout central and northwestern New Jersey, with 500 or fewer people affected in some towns, and between 5,000 and 10,000 people affected in Toms River.
> 
> ...



Record Snow Falls in Central Park, February Snowiest Month Ever - DNAinfo.com


----------



## westwall (Jul 23, 2011)

Chris said:


> At 3 p.m., the temperature in Central Park hit a chart-topping 104 degrees, blowing past the previous same-day record of 101 established in 1957&#8212;and another record of 102 degrees set earlier Friday, according to the National Weather Service.
> 
> PSE&G said 20,000 customers in New Jersey lost power, though 5,000 of those were because of a storm in the afternoon, not the heat. Jersey Central Power & Light also reported failures throughout central and northwestern New Jersey, with 500 or fewer people affected in some towns, and between 5,000 and 10,000 people affected in Toms River.
> 
> ...







Yeah imagine that.  The last time the record was set the thermometer was in a nice big open field.  Now it's situated right next to a nice hot building.....amidst a sea of concrete.
I wonder if it is on the south facing side?


----------



## daveman (Jul 23, 2011)

westwall said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > At 3 p.m., the temperature in Central Park hit a chart-topping 104 degrees, blowing past the previous same-day record of 101 established in 1957and another record of 102 degrees set earlier Friday, according to the National Weather Service.
> ...


No, no, they say they take that into account.

Then again -- they say a lot of shit.


----------



## Old Rocks (Jul 23, 2011)

*LOL. There were a bunch here yahooing that Muller was going to blast the climate scientists out of the water. Instead, he confirmed their findings. Including the data from the surface stations. LOL*

Experts Heat Up Over Berkeley Lab Scientist's Quest to 'Calm' Climate Change Debate - NYTimes.com

BEST's preliminary results show a warming trend of 0.7 degrees Celsius since 1957. That result, which Muller called "unexpected," is similar to the findings of independent analyses by NASA, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the U.K. Hadley Centre. 

"The world temperature data has sufficient integrity to be used to determine temperature trends," Muller told the House Science, Space and Technology Committee. 

That contradicts arguments made by climate skeptics -- including blogger Anthony Watts of "Watts Up With That?" -- who allege that many of the weather stations are located in areas that would bias their observations. A station might be placed in a rural area that is eventually enveloped by development, creating a situation where the urban heat island effect could influence the observations it collects, for example. 

A study published last year by researchers at NOAA's National Climatic Data Center found evidence that some weather station temperature data are of poor quality -- but it concluded the problematic data would add a slight bias toward cooling in climate analyses. 

Watts -- who Muller called "a hero" for his weather station work -- isn't convinced. And he's not happy about the preliminary analysis by Muller's BEST team, judging by comments he posted on his blog. They include a letter rebutting Muller's testimony, which Watts submitted yesterday to the House Science panel before its hearing had concluded


----------



## Chris (Jul 23, 2011)

Record Events for Sat Jul 16, 2011 through Fri Jul 22, 2011 

High Temperatures: 768 
Low Temperatures: 120 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## ScienceRocks (Jul 23, 2011)

Old Rocks said:


> *LOL. There were a bunch here yahooing that Muller was going to blast the climate scientists out of the water. Instead, he confirmed their findings. Including the data from the surface stations. LOL*
> 
> Experts Heat Up Over Berkeley Lab Scientist's Quest to 'Calm' Climate Change Debate - NYTimes.com
> 
> ...



.7c since 1957? Holy crap that is almost twice the giss.


----------



## Old Rocks (Jul 23, 2011)

Muller's number, not that of GISS.


----------



## ScienceRocks (Jul 23, 2011)

Old Rocks said:


> Muller's number, not that of GISS.



Is the .7c a global combined land and ocean temperature or just land. Would make sense if it is land alone.


----------



## Old Rocks (Jul 23, 2011)

Sceptics make BEST U-turn as study indicates warming | Carbon Brief

Haven't seen Muller's full report yet, this blog indicates that it is land temps.


----------



## ScienceRocks (Jul 23, 2011)

Old Rocks said:


> Sceptics make BEST U-turn as study indicates warming | Carbon Brief
> 
> Haven't seen Muller's full report yet, this blog indicates that it is land temps.



What is it going to take for the skeptics to admit that it has been warming for the past 30 years? Seriously.


----------



## westwall (Jul 23, 2011)

Old Rocks said:


> *LOL. There were a bunch here yahooing that Muller was going to blast the climate scientists out of the water. Instead, he confirmed their findings. Including the data from the surface stations. LOL*
> 
> Experts Heat Up Over Berkeley Lab Scientist's Quest to 'Calm' Climate Change Debate - NYTimes.com
> 
> ...







Uh ohhhhhh,........Looks like the Koch brothers are funders.  The alarmists will disavow BEST now that that info is out.


"But yesterday wasn't the first time the BEST effort has come under scrutiny. Joe Romm, a senior fellow at the liberal Center for American Progress, has called into question the study's funders, which include the Charles G. Koch Charitable Foundation -- which has supported efforts opposing mainstream climate change science."


----------



## gslack (Jul 24, 2011)

Old Rocks said:


> gslack said:
> 
> 
> > Old Rocks said:
> ...



No socks, its not cheating you're just completely ignorant of what you post. Now please tell us about MENSA...


----------



## Chris (Jul 24, 2011)

Record Events for Sun Jul 17, 2011 through Sat Jul 23, 2011 

High Temperatures: 867 
Low Temperatures: 91 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## ScienceRocks (Jul 24, 2011)

Solomon (2011) paper

"Near-global satellite aerosol data imply a negative radiative forcing due to stratospheric aerosol changes over this period of about &#8211;0.1 W/m2, reducing the recent global warming that would otherwise have occurred."


----------



## OohPooPahDoo (Jul 24, 2011)

RetiredGySgt said:


> You did not care when the cold was record.



Maybe you can refresh our memories.


----------



## OohPooPahDoo (Jul 24, 2011)

skookerasbil said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > Record Events for Mon Mar 14, 2011 through Sun Mar 20, 2011
> ...





I'm afraid you can't change objective reality with a vote.


----------



## Patrick2 (Jul 24, 2011)

OohPooPahDoo said:


> skookerasbil said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...



But the IPCC scientists, the overwhelming majority of whom never did any research on the subject, in effect "voted' to endorse the report ascribing warming to AGW.


----------



## editec (Jul 24, 2011)

skookerasbil said:


> Your post makes no sense s0n.............no amount of explanation can help............
> 
> 
> On Thought Process Disorder: see "loose associations" and "perseverative thinking".
> ...


 

You're evading the question, Lad.

You made an assertion that public opinion determines climate change.

Apparently you are now recanting that position.

We'll just have to presume, since you are not man enough to respond honestly, that even you must realize that what you wrote doesn't really make sense.


----------



## Old Rocks (Jul 24, 2011)

Patrick2 said:


> OohPooPahDoo said:
> 
> 
> > skookerasbil said:
> ...



Now why don't you just back that lying assertation up?


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 24, 2011)

Old Rocks said:


> Patrick2 said:
> 
> 
> > OohPooPahDoo said:
> ...




C'Mon........who cares if all of them were involved in the research? Doesnt make a dime's bit of difference.
Add anyway........the IPCC hs been exposed as a total fraud in the last 2 years.


http://www.thenewamerican.com/index.php/tech-mainmenu-30/environment/2377-ipcc-researchers-admit-global-warming-fraud


And please with the investigation that found proof of no wrongdoing.........completed by a comittee of peers. In my line of work over the last 25 years, Ive had to initiate somewhere in the whereabouts of 350 investigations. In every single case, an OUTSIDE and UNAFFILIATED division of quality assurance came in to review the evidence and take statements. Had I tried to investigate even one of those 350 cases on my own..........Id lose my job.......... because of the outside PERCEPTION that I could not have arrived at a determination wihtout some level of subjectivity.

The IPCC is a fraud.


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 24, 2011)




----------



## editec (Jul 24, 2011)

Chris said:


> At 3 p.m., the temperature in Central Park hit a chart-topping 104 degrees, blowing past the previous same-day record of 101 established in 1957&#8212;and another record of 102 degrees set earlier Friday, according to the National Weather Service.
> 
> PSE&G said 20,000 customers in New Jersey lost power, though 5,000 of those were because of a storm in the afternoon, not the heat. Jersey Central Power & Light also reported failures throughout central and northwestern New Jersey, with 500 or fewer people affected in some towns, and between 5,000 and 10,000 people affected in Toms River.
> 
> ...


 
Oh my! 

Combine that with high humity and high ozone and the weather is positively deadly.

I couldn't believe how uncomfortable it was thurday here in Maine.

I really love hots summer days and night but the mercury definitely challenged my affection for hot weather on that day.

YOu cannot imagine how much I congratulate myself for having the foresight to move out of the mid-Atlantic states nearly 25 years ago.

I saw the evlevation in average termperatures coming and reckoned that moving to Maine would buy us a few decades before the summer temps were ...well...what they've become down in PA, NJ, NY, and CT and even MA.

Clearly the only real East Coast solution (assuming this trend continues) will be to migrate with the seasons such that you avoid both the extremes of winter (which seem to be moving South) and the extremes of summer (which appear to be migrating North).


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 24, 2011)

editec said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > At 3 p.m., the temperature in Central Park hit a chart-topping 104 degrees, blowing past the previous same-day record of 101 established in 1957and another record of 102 degrees set earlier Friday, according to the National Weather Service.
> ...





Nova Scotia bro.............

IDK.......I always wanted to go there............


----------



## Bigfoot (Jul 24, 2011)

OMG its hot!  ..and in the middle of July no less!?!?


----------



## Chris (Jul 24, 2011)

Record Events for Sun Jul 17, 2011 through Sat Jul 23, 2011 

High Temperatures: 940 
Low Temperatures: 103 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## Patrick2 (Jul 24, 2011)

Old Rocks said:


> Patrick2 said:
> 
> 
> > OohPooPahDoo said:
> ...



About 1000 scientists literally voted to accept the report.  Do your homework - I'm not tutoring anyone about news events.


----------



## ScienceRocks (Jul 24, 2011)

How does this heat wave compare to 1995s midwestern Heat wave?


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Jul 24, 2011)

When will the Weather Channel stop intentionally misreporting?! It wasn't a high pressure system, it was ManMade Global Warming!

Amirgth?

Old Rocks? Chris?  Konrad?

Weather Channel said it was a "High pressure system"  What are they, Deniers?


----------



## tommyc (Jul 24, 2011)

Media Myth Debunked: Almost No Temperature Records Broken in Last Week's 'Record-Breaking Heat'

All last week, global warming-obsessed media were rife with reports about record-breaking heat.

Problem is, according to the National Climatic Data Center, and marvelously reported by the Hockey Schtick Sunday, almost no temperature records were actually broken:

[T]he NOAA database of all-time Max Temperature...shows that there were no records broken on July 17, July 18, July 19, or July 20th. A total of 4 stations broke records on July 21, 20 on July 22, and 10 on July 23, 2011.

That's right. There were only 34 new all-time daily temperature records set during last week's "record-breaking heat."

This is out of over 6000 records previously set for each day since such things have been reported.

For instance, the four set Thursday were out of 6,219 historically for that day. This represented only 0.06 percent.

On Friday, 20 records were set out of 6,108, or 0.3 percent.

As you can see, the actual records broken were statistically insignificant.

Yet a Google search of "record-breaking heat July 2011" produced almost 35 million results.

That's more than a million stories per new record set.

Seems the exaggeration at play is even greater than the number of Americans now claiming they attended Woodstock.

Makes you wonder if all these so-called journalists were smoking something last week as if they were still at Max Yasgur's farm.

THE HOCKEY SCHTICK: 'Record-breaking' US heat wave breaks records at < 0.4% of stations during past week


----------



## Chris (Jul 24, 2011)

Tommyc, those noaa records are only for all time tempertures for the entire month, not for the day and city.

And they are not even updated beyond April 2011 when you click on the link...

You need to get away from right wing nut blogs....

Here's the real info....

Record Events for Sun Jul 17, 2011 through Sat Jul 23, 2011 

High Temperatures: 940 
Low Temperatures: 108 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## tommyc (Jul 24, 2011)

Chris said:


> Tommyc, those noaa records are only for all time tempertures for the entire month, not for the day and city.
> 
> And they are not even updated beyond April 2011 when you click on the link...
> 
> ...




So NOAA doesn't count huh?


----------



## saveliberty (Jul 24, 2011)

Explaining the 108 new lows ought to prove interesting...


----------



## Chris (Jul 24, 2011)

tommyc said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > Tommyc, those noaa records are only for all time tempertures for the entire month, not for the day and city.
> ...



Reading is fundamental.

Read my post again.


----------



## saveliberty (Jul 24, 2011)

Chris said:


> tommyc said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...



Deflection comes in pretty damn handy too, in your case Chris.


----------



## ScienceRocks (Jul 24, 2011)

saveliberty said:


> Explaining the 108 new lows ought to prove interesting...




Each time some one post this question or something related to it I'm going to post this. 

This heat wave is Caused by a death ridge over the midwest at 500 millibars.The cooler then normal air--- on each side of a ridge there is normally a "trough" a trough is a dip within the jet stream with the cooler air to the north of the jet stream...So imagine the midwest is within a intense ridge with record hot and dry weather, but the west coast is within the cold and rainy crap. One of the coldest for Portland in the past 70 years so far.  Lets think about the ridge as divergence at the surface, which pretty much means the air is moving inwards at the upper levels 200-300 millibars, but moving outwards as it moves to 500 to 1013 millibars. What this does is increase the pressure of the column of air and that rises the pressure.  This also does the opposite of the air within a area of low pressure. Air within the northern side of the jet stream normally favors low pressure area's and is cooler as said above. Low pressure moves inward and warm moist air raises into the Atmosphere and cools towards its dew point--->this is what we call condensation once it cools to that.  Clouds and rainy weather. The air raising from the surface to the 25-40 thousand feet is why a low pressure is called a low pressure, and is why it lowers the pressure as the column of air is now pressing down less pressure onto the surface.

A low pressure of 992 millibars is causing 9,920 bars of pressure on the surface, but a high could cause 1020 millibars or 10,200 bars onto that surface.  In yes that is a difference of air pressure pressing onto the surface.

Not really so much climate when you think about the day to day, but imagine for a second that the above avg area's are above normal, but cover a larger area of the earth and of course your going to get below normal area's at the same time---the earth is not uniform my friends...It really is how you avg it out is how you get a idea of what changes a change climate may of had. Europe and the east coast last winter was very cold, but the arctic was 10-15c warmer then normal at the same time. Much of northern russia to was warmer if I remember...

*Lets look at this in another way...*

You have 10,526,000 sq miles of .5c above normal
You have 6,546,456 sq miles at -.5c above normal
Yes this is very simple, but lets say for a second that those two made up the surface area of the earth...You would have a above normal global avg!

Portland can be colder, but a larger percentage of the United states has been above normal so far this summer season---In I agree it is one of the coldest summers I've seen.

...
When you increase the "heat" you also increase the cold anomalies, but the heat or above avg is larger in scale then the cold anomalies. Weather being that the jet stream and weather systems will still spin around our globe, but the droughts and rainfalls will increase. 

That might go over your heads being that you might think, wow shit, if you have more rainfall shouldn't there be NO droughts? But remember the patterns of the jet stream and ridges and troughs will remain(weather) and occur. You will get ridges of high pressure that sit for months on end with that hotter drier air. Doing what you see in Texas and of course you will have on the sides area's of unseasonable cold and rainy weather. 

The air will be able to hold more moisture as you increase the temperature too. One case in point is the difference between Antarctica being only a fraction .1grams/volume of air for a dew point(constate) at maybe -30c to a area like Portland that is around 50f that holds like 4-5grams/volume of air for the same. So more extreme rains when and where your not dealing with a super ridge of high pressure!


----------



## tommyc (Jul 24, 2011)

Lets try this site and put in dates and see if any new highs were set.
U.S. All-Time Highest Max Temperature Records set on July 17, 2011


----------



## saveliberty (Jul 24, 2011)

You had me at jet stream.   lol

I would have added an ocean current shift too, but good enough.


----------



## ScienceRocks (Jul 24, 2011)

What the graph shows from 1990-2011 is
1# The volcano caused .3c to .4 of overall cooling from 1991-1993, which corrected its self from 1993-1998. The super nino also made the 90's appear to raise on the graph much faster then they otherwise should of.
2# Once we got out of the super nino of 1998 the period from 1998-2005 was pretty much a solar maximum, but we didn't see a super nino within this period or any real nino's outside of a weak one in 2004. Instead a nina from 1999-2001, which case the 2002-2005 period had a warm enso like pattern with this maximum solar output(tsi).
3# After 2005 the sun went into a grand minimum much a like 1880-1915 period and 1800-1820's, which means more negative forcing.
4# China's and the other developing worlds coal emissions sky rocketed=sulfur. Sulfur is why volcano's can cool the earth. So it is proven without a doubt that it can be a negative forcing.

So in conclusion 2006-2011 has been greatly effected by negative forcing. 

If you look at a graph you will notice how we corrected coming out of the cooling in 1991. This occurred slowly over 3-4 years...1998 put the cherry on top as a huge anomaly. Pretty much I believe that each decade is likely to rise now at .12c-.14c and the rss/uah estimates are right. In fact we may raise slower then that if the negative forcing keeps increasing.

Look at the cloud of crap on some satellite imagines coming out of china and you will understand what is going on. Then look at the grand minimum that we're in that is much like solar cycle 5.

This makes sense within what is being observed.


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Jul 24, 2011)

It's much cooler today, the Global Warming system passed.


----------



## Chris (Jul 24, 2011)

RALEIGH, N.C. &#8212; Raleigh's heat wave has broken a record.

The National Weather Service says North Carolina's capital city reached 100 degrees Sunday for the fifth day in a row.

Previously, the longest 100-degree streak was three days. That record was originally set in 1983 and matched in 2008.

Much of central and eastern North Carolina remained under heat warnings and advisories until Sunday night.

Raleigh sets temperature record, hitting 100 degrees for 5th day in a row | The Republic


----------



## Chris (Jul 24, 2011)

In Dallas, temperatures have been 100 degrees or more for 23 straight days. The Weather Channel forecasts at least another 10 days of that.

Extreme temperatures may continue into August. The Climate Prediction Center forecasts warmer than average temperatures over 95% of the contiguous United States for the first week of the month.

Last week's heat broke records in several spots. All-time high temperatures were set Friday in Newark (108 degrees); Washington Dulles Airport (105); and Hartford, Conn., (103), according to meteorologist Jeff Masters of the Weather Underground. Baltimore hit 106 degrees on Friday, one degree shy of its all-time high, and Central Park in New York City saw 104, 2 degrees short of its all-time-high record.

July is on pace to be one of the five hottest months in U.S. history, Masters said.

East Coast heat eases, but there's more on the way - USATODAY.com


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Jul 24, 2011)

Cooler today than yesterday over here so the Global Warming Crisis has passed


----------



## saveliberty (Jul 24, 2011)

So now its global warming if the warmest day of the year happens in July instead of August.  Got it.


----------



## ScienceRocks (Jul 24, 2011)

CrusaderFrank said:


> Cooler today than yesterday over here so the Global Warming Crisis has passed




Some area's are going to be above normal and some of them are going to be below. When avg together because the warmer then normal is either 1# larger and geographical scale or 2# intensity is going to=a warm then avg anomaly on the global scale. You will have weather and weather changes. 

You have 10,526,000 sq miles of .5c above normal
You have 6,546,456 sq miles at -.5c above normal
Yes this is very simple, but lets say for a second that those two made up the surface area of the earth...You would have a above normal global avg!

Portland can be colder, but a larger percentage of the United states has been above normal so far this summer season---In I agree it is one of the coldest summers I've seen.


----------



## saveliberty (Jul 24, 2011)

Need a hockey stick graph Matthew?


----------



## ScienceRocks (Jul 24, 2011)

saveliberty said:


> So now its global warming if the warmest day of the year happens in July instead of August.  Got it.



If within a *portion* or *area* of a nation or continent there is a strong area of high pressure, which  sets up that promotes hotter weather within July--->sure you can get your hottest days in july to only then to watch this pattern break down in August with below to near avg temperatures.


----------



## saveliberty (Jul 24, 2011)

Gee is it hot in here, or is Old Rocks just glad to see me?


----------



## ScienceRocks (Jul 24, 2011)

saveliberty said:


> Need a hockey stick graph Matthew?



What does every day weather or rather the global avg for this week, month or year could avg above normal have to do with the hockey stick?


----------



## Care4all (Jul 24, 2011)

Thank God!  Praise the Lord!  Thank you Jeeeeeeesus!

Our heat wave has broken!!!!!   no more near 100 degree days! (Doing the Happy Dance!)


i had been sick all week with a high fever, coupled with the near 100 degree days, it just was miserable!

It's 60 degrees outside right now!!!  Got the windows opened with a cool breeze.... flowing!  Gosh.....I love Maine!


----------



## saveliberty (Jul 24, 2011)

What was causing your fever?  Perhaps....


....



Mr. Bieber?


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Jul 24, 2011)

Care4all said:


> Thank God!  Praise the Lord!  Thank you Jeeeeeeesus!
> 
> Our heat wave has broken!!!!!   no more near 100 degree days! (Doing the Happy Dance!)
> 
> ...



That ends Global Warming in Maine


----------



## daveman (Jul 24, 2011)

CrusaderFrank said:


> Care4all said:
> 
> 
> > Thank God!  Praise the Lord!  Thank you Jeeeeeeesus!
> ...



Now they'll have to call it Slightly Less Than Global Warming.


----------



## OohPooPahDoo (Jul 25, 2011)

Patrick2 said:


> OohPooPahDoo said:
> 
> 
> > skookerasbil said:
> ...



What percentage have never done any research on the subject?
How do you objectively decide whether or not their research counts as "any research on the subject"?
How long did it take you to review all of their publications to make that determination? That's a lot of work on your part, impressive.


----------



## OohPooPahDoo (Jul 25, 2011)

skookerasbil said:


> And please with the investigation that found proof of no wrongdoing.........completed by a comittee of peers. In my line of work over the last 25 years, Ive had to initiate somewhere in the whereabouts of 350 investigations. In every single case, an OUTSIDE and UNAFFILIATED division of quality assurance came in to review the evidence and take statements. Had I tried to investigate even one of those 350 cases on my own..........Id lose my job.......... because of the outside PERCEPTION that I could not have arrived at a determination wihtout some level of subjectivity.
> 
> The IPCC is a fraud.




What field of science do you do your research in?


----------



## RollingThunder (Jul 25, 2011)

OohPooPahDoo said:


> skookerasbil said:
> 
> 
> > And please with the investigation that found proof of no wrongdoing.........completed by a comittee of peers. In my line of work over the last 25 years, Ive had to initiate somewhere in the whereabouts of 350 investigations. In every single case, an OUTSIDE and UNAFFILIATED division of quality assurance came in to review the evidence and take statements. Had I tried to investigate even one of those 350 cases on my own..........Id lose my job.......... because of the outside PERCEPTION that I could not have arrived at a determination wihtout some level of subjectivity.
> ...



The kookster's field is obviously 'crapology'. Crap is the only thing he knows but he knows it very intimately and personally. In fact, it is the only thing he ever posts.


----------



## gslack (Jul 25, 2011)

I smell a clone....


----------



## Patrick2 (Jul 25, 2011)

OohPooPahDoo said:


> Patrick2 said:
> 
> 
> > OohPooPahDoo said:
> ...



  Read up.

Bitten by the IPCC


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Jul 25, 2011)

wow 65 degrees here this morning, that 20 degrees less than the same time a few days ago...Global Cooling?  At this rate it will be colder than Pluto in a few weeks


----------



## Old Rocks (Jul 25, 2011)

gslack said:


> I smell a clone....



I smell a g-string, and it stinks.


----------



## daveman (Jul 25, 2011)

RollingThunder said:


> OohPooPahDoo said:
> 
> 
> > skookerasbil said:
> ...


What field of science do you do your research in?


----------



## daveman (Jul 25, 2011)

CrusaderFrank said:


> wow 65 degrees here this morning, that 20 degrees less than the same time a few days ago...Global Cooling?  At this rate it will be colder than Pluto in a few weeks



We had two inches of rain yesterday.  ZOMG!  Global Precipitation!


----------



## Chris (Jul 25, 2011)

Record Events for Mon Jul 18, 2011 through Sun Jul 24, 2011 

High Temperatures: 1057 
Low Temperatures: 96 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## westwall (Jul 25, 2011)

OohPooPahDoo said:


> Patrick2 said:
> 
> 
> > OohPooPahDoo said:
> ...







After reviewing three "studies" and observing the lack of scientific rigour, then witnessing the continuing falsification of the historical record it is no longer neccessary to read anything from climate 'mafia'.  They have demonstrated their complete lack of scientific ethics so they no longer matter.


----------



## westwall (Jul 25, 2011)

RollingThunder said:


> OohPooPahDoo said:
> 
> 
> > skookerasbil said:
> ...






And yet he can understand simple forum rules which you, the supposed "enlightened one" can't.  I'll take his word, and observed superiority, over your proven and demonstrable  incompetence any day of the week.


----------



## westwall (Jul 25, 2011)

gslack said:


> I smell a clone....







Aren't they all?


----------



## ScienceRocks (Jul 25, 2011)

I've came to the conclusion that we could have a negative energy balance right now and still get a warming planet. Look at cru, which excludes much of the arctic ocean area and the giss----see the difference. The cru since 2004 has seen NO warming, but giss has seen .16c or so of warming with rss and uah showing the same. 

I think the period from 1997-2004 was enough to send the arctic over a tipping point, meaning less sea ice to reflect the sun light, which the oceans take more and more of the heat energy and release that heat throughout the year. This keeps the arctic warmer and this loops into its self. Arctic amplification it is called. The cru proves without a doubt that much of the rest of the planet HASN'T warmed at all since 2004 period. 

Reasons for this as I've stated
1# Grand minimum since 2005, which is bringing about a negative forcing and counter balancing the co2 forcing. 
2# It was never warming as fast as the slope would have you to believe in the 1990's as it was correcting for the vei 6 volcano over a 6 year period. So .14c is about all we ever warmed to start out with.

Solar cycle 5 did cool the planet over a decade to near .15 or so. So I believe based on the historic data that it is possible for the grand minimum to be stabilizing the global temperature.

How do I explain the rest of the worlds glacial melting? The same way more or less as I believe once you get to a point they will melt. All you need is above freezing to melt ice. This is how I explain Antarctica east ice sheet melting and some of Greenland.

The arctic amplification is enough to warm our planet up even through the balance is near a balance overall with negative forcing and positive forcing balancing each other.

Even James Hansen is coming around to some of my thinking.  But he states that sulfur is negative human emissions are doing a lot of it, but I'm saying a natural grand minimum is doing it.


Old rocks or anyone do you agree?


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 25, 2011)

Matthew said:


> I've came to the conclusion that...........




s0n........seriously. Really.......


The environmental extremists are THE textbook illustrations of narrcicists.


----------



## ScienceRocks (Jul 25, 2011)

skookerasbil said:


> Matthew said:
> 
> 
> > I've came to the conclusion that...........
> ...



Does my theory over the past 6-7 years make any sense to you?


----------



## daveman (Jul 25, 2011)

It was very pleasant last night and this morning, then it warmed up this afternoon.  

ZOMG!  Global Typical Temperate Summer!


----------



## gslack (Jul 25, 2011)

Matthew said:


> I've came to the conclusion that we could have a negative energy balance right now and still get a warming planet. Look at cru, which excludes much of the arctic ocean area and the giss----see the difference. The cru since 2004 has seen NO warming, but giss has seen .16c or so of warming with rss and uah showing the same.
> 
> I think the period from 1997-2004 was enough to send the arctic over a tipping point, meaning less sea ice to reflect the sun light, which the oceans take more and more of the heat energy and release that heat throughout the year. This keeps the arctic warmer and this loops into its self. Arctic amplification it is called. The cru proves without a doubt that much of the rest of the planet HASN'T warmed at all since 2004 period.
> 
> ...



Matt you just went and did a very long post to basically say you don't know but you may have some ideas perhaps, if the data you have is correct... Maybe...

I have an idea. Why not give the same faith or benefit of the doubt to the concept that climate scientists are still human and will protect themselves when their livelihood is threatened. They use misleading charts and graphs to make claims that often are based on the most circumstantial of evidence, and create these using climate models based on an incomplete set of factors and what actual hard data they do collect gets run through various algorithms and ever more elaborate and complex equations. You can make anything you want appear to be true if you run it through enough complexities.

You say you are not sure and just curious about this, yet you do not question their claims only try and prove them... Why not be a bit more objective and see what ya find..


----------



## Chris (Jul 26, 2011)

Nationally, 1,966 daily high maximum temperature records have been broken or tied so far this month (through July 23). Sixty-six of those records were all-time maximum temperature records.More impressive, however, are the figures for highest minimum temperature records. Because of the extremely high humidity levels during this heat wave, a whopping 4,376 record highest minimum temperature records were broken or tied through July 23. Of those minimum temperature records, 158 were all-time records.

Heat wave 2011: humidity the stunning hallmark - Capital Weather Gang - The Washington Post


----------



## tommyc (Jul 26, 2011)

daveman said:


> It was very pleasant last night and this morning, then it warmed up this afternoon.
> 
> ZOMG!  Global Typical Temperate Summer!



I see your from the great state of Kentucky as am I , bravo  , just had to throw that in there.


----------



## daveman (Jul 26, 2011)

tommyc said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > It was very pleasant last night and this morning, then it warmed up this afternoon.
> ...


Cain't have too many Kentuckians here.


----------



## Old Rocks (Jul 26, 2011)

gslack said:


> Matthew said:
> 
> 
> > I've came to the conclusion that we could have a negative energy balance right now and still get a warming planet. Look at cru, which excludes much of the arctic ocean area and the giss----see the difference. The cru since 2004 has seen NO warming, but giss has seen .16c or so of warming with rss and uah showing the same.
> ...



OK, show us some scientific data to back up your accusatons. 

If I find 99 doctors that state I have a certain problem, but there is one that states the problem exists, who am I to believe? And what are the consequences if those 99 are correct? 

Were we to phase out and replace fossil fuels with alternatives, what are the consequences? And what are the consequences if the overwhelming scientific consensus is correct, and we continue on our present path?

You make accusations of fraud about most of the world's scientific community, and find the people defending the purses of the fossil fuel industry pure as driven snow. You are one ignorant idiot.


----------



## Old Rocks (Jul 26, 2011)

Matthew said:


> I've came to the conclusion that we could have a negative energy balance right now and still get a warming planet. Look at cru, which excludes much of the arctic ocean area and the giss----see the difference. The cru since 2004 has seen NO warming, but giss has seen .16c or so of warming with rss and uah showing the same.
> 
> I think the period from 1997-2004 was enough to send the arctic over a tipping point, meaning less sea ice to reflect the sun light, which the oceans take more and more of the heat energy and release that heat throughout the year. This keeps the arctic warmer and this loops into its self. Arctic amplification it is called. The cru proves without a doubt that much of the rest of the planet HASN'T warmed at all since 2004 period.
> 
> ...



The forcing that we are seeing from the ice melt and thaw in the Arctic region is definately have a positive affect. Big enough to overcome the present negatives? Looks like it. And that is a very dangerous situation. For, as we continue to dump ever increasing amounts of GHGs into the atmosphere, when one of these negative forcings goes neutral, or even positive, Katy bar the door.


----------



## Patrick2 (Jul 26, 2011)

Old Rocks said:


> Matthew said:
> 
> 
> > I've came to the conclusion that we could have a negative energy balance right now and still get a warming planet. Look at cru, which excludes much of the arctic ocean area and the giss----see the difference. The cru since 2004 has seen NO warming, but giss has seen .16c or so of warming with rss and uah showing the same.
> ...



Ice melt isn't a forcing factor, it's a symptom.


----------



## Chris (Jul 26, 2011)

Record Events for Tue Jul 19, 2011 through Mon Jul 25, 2011 

High Temperatures: 1146 
Low Temperatures: 99 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## Old Rocks (Jul 26, 2011)

Patrick2 said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> > Matthew said:
> ...



Really? Did you bother to think that through? 

Ice, reflects 90% incoming sunlight.

Water, absorbs 90% incoming sunlight.

At the point where there is a steady decrease over a period of years, the lack of ice becomes a positive feedback factor.


----------



## Old Rocks (Jul 26, 2011)

Chris said:


> Record Events for Tue Jul 19, 2011 through Mon Jul 25, 2011
> 
> High Temperatures: 1146
> Low Temperatures: 99
> ...



Perhaps more important is the record in red;

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View

Record Events for Tue Jul 19, 2011 through Mon Jul 25, 2011 
Total Records: 4417 
Rainfall: 446 
High Temperatures: 1146 
Low Temperatures: 99 
Lowest Max Temperatures: 122 
Highest Min Temperatures: 2604


----------



## gslack (Jul 27, 2011)

Old Rocks said:


> Patrick2 said:
> 
> 
> > Old Rocks said:
> ...



Thats very interesting you make this claim socks, because its my understanding that in winter the arctic gets very little direct sunlight. In fact its in virtual darkness the entire season. So IF the sun hits it the least in the winter when the ice is at its greatest coverage point, its not as big a driver as one would be led to assume.

Moreover a positive feedback has an end. Its built into the planet. If it didn't the last ice age would have never ended, and the last warming period wouldn't exist. I am about tired of explaining critical thinking and common sense to a self-proclaimed member of MENSA....


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 27, 2011)

toxic green Keynesianism still losing BIG................

From today on REALCLEAR..................

http://opinion.financialpost.com/2011/07/26/peter-foster-keystone-%C2%ADversus-green-keynesianism/



Translation = "record events" are irrelevant.


----------



## RollingThunder (Jul 27, 2011)

gslack said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> > Patrick2 said:
> ...



LOLOLOLOL....You are soooo funny, slackjawedidiot.....you wouldn't recognize common sense and critical thinking if they bit you. You're one of the biggest denier cult retards on this forum. You repeatedly demonstrate that you have absolutely no idea what is going on.

You mention the fact that the Arctic gets very little sun in the winter months but you conveniently or idiotically ignore the corollary. In the summer months the sun is above the horizon 24 hours a day. It is the sun hitting open dark water instead of reflective ice in the summer that is causing increasing warmth and creating a feedback loop that causes more warming. Try growing a brain before you embarrass yourself further by posting something idiotic again.


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 27, 2011)

toxic green Keynesianism still losing BIG................

From today on REALCLEAR..................



Peter Foster: Keystone *versus green Keynesianism | FP Comment | Financial Post



heres to economic focus on gay green energy like windmills


Go..........go.........go.............right through the next 16 months!!


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 27, 2011)

more epic losing................

Obama's Weekly Job Approval Ties Term Low of 43%


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 27, 2011)

Investing in clean coal technology is highly recommended if you have some bucks to invest with............

The tsunami is coming.................


----------



## Chris (Jul 27, 2011)

Record Events for Wed Jul 20, 2011 through Tue Jul 26, 2011 

High Temperatures: 1146 
Low Temperatures: 88 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## ScienceRocks (Jul 28, 2011)

The suns modern maximum keeps on going!!!

HadCRUT3 6-2011: +0.43 °C. Rank: 8/162
Warmest June in this series was in 1998.
Average last 12 months: 0.37 °C.


----------



## Chris (Jul 28, 2011)

Record Events for Thu Jul 21, 2011 through Wed Jul 27, 2011 

High Temperatures: 1094 
Low Temperatures: 83 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## gslack (Jul 29, 2011)

RollingThunder said:


> gslack said:
> 
> 
> > Old Rocks said:
> ...



Oh yes that blasted killer feedback loop again.... 

Can you show me that? Got any kind of evidence other than a climate model? No of course not so there you are moron. You really believe that the oceans continue to warm with no sunlight hitting them because it did hit them for half the year? LOL are you reading a algorianism for dummies book or do you have a idiotic fake climate expert talking in your ear?  

Dude your response looks contrived or in the least "googled" ...


----------



## Old Rocks (Jul 29, 2011)

Dumb ass G-string. If you nonsense held any water, why is the Arctic Ice Pack shrinking so radically? Why does the volume continue to go down almost every year. 

http://neven1.typepad.com/.a/6a0133f03a1e37970b01538e68f70e970b-pi


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Jul 29, 2011)

It was 80 here today, 20 degree off from the AGW high last week. So that means the High Pressure system drove AGW away, right?


----------



## Old Rocks (Jul 29, 2011)

Why no, Franky boy, it means that it never happened. It could not happen, after all, people like you predicted cooling, therefore, the last two weeks never happened. Just like the floods from May to present on the Missouri and Mississippi are not happening. And ol' Limpbaugh assured us that Heat Index is meaningless. Especially if your are blown out of your mind on Hillbilly Heroin, sitting in an air conditioned office.


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Jul 29, 2011)

Old Rocks said:


> Why no, Franky boy, it means that it never happened. It could not happen, after all, people like you predicted cooling, therefore, the last two weeks never happened. Just like the floods from May to present on the Missouri and Mississippi are not happening. And ol' Limpbaugh assured us that Heat Index is meaningless. Especially if your are blown out of your mind on Hillbilly Heroin, sitting in an air conditioned office.



I predict cooling the same way you predict warming: its cooler today than yesterday, therefore, at the present rate of cooling we will be at absolute zero by Labor Day. I have the same science behind my theory as you do.

In the real world, we've been in an overall warming period the last 14,000 years or so.

I never predicted "Cooling" I guess if I lost every argument as badly as you did I might have to start making things up too.


----------



## gslack (Jul 29, 2011)

Old Rocks said:


> Dumb ass G-string. If you nonsense held any water, why is the Arctic Ice Pack shrinking so radically? Why does the volume continue to go down almost every year.
> 
> http://neven1.typepad.com/.a/6a0133f03a1e37970b01538e68f70e970b-pi



Hey google MENSA man nice choice on where to get that image.. LOL, A random Typepad blog? Really?..

Do you know what an anomaly is? Your graph records ice coverage anomalies relative to 1979 to 2011 average. Don't understand it do you... Yeah so much for MENSA,  First the average they use to make the claim is represented by the mean of just the last 22 years.. Thats it, 22 years to make an average to show what exactly? That the ice anomalies had a decline of around -10 to -11 at its lowest point, and that trend of decline remained steady over the last 22 years... Anomalies, what are anomalies? Well as it pertains to this it would be strange or unexplained or abnormal readings.

Here's a definition of the word anomaly...Anomaly - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary



> Definition of ANOMALY
> 
> 1
> : the angular distance of a planet from its perihelion as seen from the sun
> ...



SOOOOO, you sent me to a googled link to a random typepad blog, showing me a graph that shows anomalies in the ice coverage average of the last 22 years stating that anomalies over the last 22 years compared to the average are showing a continual decline in respect to the amount of ice coverage those anomalies represent on the chart.... GOt it.. LOL

And this tells us what exactly in regards to climate change? Nothing much like the rest of your PR posting nonsense... LOL MENSA man!


----------



## Old Rocks (Jul 30, 2011)

Polar Science Center » Arctic Sea Ice Volume Anomaly, version 2

Polar Science Center . Applied Physics Laboratory . University of Washington . 1013 NE 40th Street . Box 355640 . Seattle, WA 98105-6698

Voice: 206-543-6613 . Fax: 206-616-3142 . E-mail: PSCAdmin@apl.washington.edu

Polar Science Center » In the Field

Real scientists doing real science, not flap yap anti-science knownothings like you and the rest of the denialist crowd.


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 30, 2011)

Im laughing...........Rocks went over to the POLICTIS forum this am and is back in here right quick because he was getting his clock cleaned over there. Woke up this am and saw his guy who was a no-brainer icon just two years ago now just a tick over a 30% approval rating.

The left are beside themselves..............miserable to the nth degree.


Losing everywehre you look.

And by the way.........the country is on the verge of potential ecomonic crisis and the president is out there yesterday talking about CAFE Standards!!! What a genius!!


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 30, 2011)

I gotta say.......watching the left crash and burn has been one of the most satisfying events Ive ever witnessed in my whole life. Who cant love watching arrogant assholes getting telephone poles up their asses on a daily basis?


----------



## Old Rocks (Jul 30, 2011)

Well, Kooky, watching the whole nation crash and burn is hardly satisfying. But, my job is safe for a while, so why should I bitch. After all, I work for a Russian company.


----------



## westwall (Jul 30, 2011)

Old Rocks said:


> Well, Kooky, watching the whole nation crash and burn is hardly satisfying. But, my job is safe for a while, so why should I bitch. After all, I work for a Russian company.






Yes you do.  EVRAZ is a gross polluter worldwide.  Just like you are.  

*FRAUD!*


----------



## Chris (Jul 30, 2011)

Record Events for Sat Jul 23, 2011 through Fri Jul 29, 2011 

High Temperatures: 827 
Low Temperatures: 83 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 30, 2011)

Old Rocks said:


> Well, Kooky, watching the whole nation crash and burn is hardly satisfying. But, my job is safe for a while, so why should I bitch. After all, I work for a Russian company.




= the price the country pays, unfortunately, to see again, as it did 35 years ago, that everything gets fubar'd when the nation puts a lefty in charge. The guy still has a shot but only if the following happen: 1) Put a moratorium on federal regulations through 2012, especially the EPA. 2) Make a committment of no increase in taxes through 2012.

Otherwise its bye-bye to the left governing this nation for a long, long, long time........at least a generation and probably more. Then we put the varsity in charge and the worm turns.

And dont be a phoney like all the other lefties who were gleeful back in the fall of 2008 when TARP became neccesary. You were laughing your balls of then.

My turn.


----------



## gslack (Jul 31, 2011)

Old Rocks said:


> Polar Science Center » Arctic Sea Ice Volume Anomaly, version 2
> 
> Polar Science Center . Applied Physics Laboratory . University of Washington . 1013 NE 40th Street . Box 355640 . Seattle, WA 98105-6698
> 
> ...



Nice try at trying to repost that graphic using a different link....LOL pathetic...

Its a chart for anomalies moron. I explained this to you before. Ya got duped by another enviro blog telling you what a chart means.. All that chart does is chart anomalies, and anomalies are the odd readings. In this case it would most likely be the lowest recording in a given time. It tells us nothing in this context so stop trying to pretend it does moron. You MENSA BS is getting funnier by the second...

Without a reference for what they mean by "anomaly" in this chart, or data showing how they classified each as an anomalous reading, and their context in regards to that each recorded day/month/year, than the chart is useless and tells us nothing at all except the anomalies across the decades/years charted showed a decline.... Anomalies, not ice volume but strange readings in ice volume.. Get it yet MENSA man?

Keep posting this crap and use a different link each time, that way everyone can see exactly what kind of idiotic fraud you are...


----------



## Chris (Jul 31, 2011)

Record Events for Sun Jul 24, 2011 through Sat Jul 30, 2011 

High Temperatures: 647 
Low Temperatures: 61 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## gslack (Jul 31, 2011)

Chris said:


> Record Events for Sun Jul 24, 2011 through Sat Jul 30, 2011
> 
> High Temperatures: 647
> Low Temperatures: 61
> ...



Record high temps in july????? Oh my god! 

Dude your constant posting of numbers of record temps for each day does nothing to prove global warming.... So what if in the past week we had 600 some odd record highs across the US. Records mind you only since we started keeping track. It is NO evidence of a global warming beyond that of short term variability.


----------



## Old Rocks (Aug 1, 2011)

Total Records: 2472 
Rainfall: 593 
High Temperatures: 537 
Low Temperatures: 45 
Lowest Max Temperatures: 109 
Highest Min Temperatures: 1188 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View

Even more significant than the ratio of high temp records to low temp records, is the highest minimum temperatures. That means that those places are not cooling at night as they have in the past.


----------



## Old Rocks (Aug 1, 2011)

gslack said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > Record Events for Sun Jul 24, 2011 through Sat Jul 30, 2011
> ...



Ol' G-string once again demonstrates his lack of comprehension. It ain't whether the high temp record is in July or January. It is the ratio of high temp records for any period to those of the low temp records that count. If you are consistently getting a high ratio of high temps record over low temp records, and this goes on for a number of years, then it is safe to state that there is a warming going on. And that has been the case.

Of course, pointing out logic to G-string is a failed exercise.


----------



## gslack (Aug 1, 2011)

Old Rocks said:


> gslack said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...



LOL, thanks for pointing out once again you cannot think on a secondary level oldsocks...

My point still remains the same. A higher ratio of record highs posted on a daily basis here does not show evidence of AGW. Climate involves centuries, weather involves days get it yet?

A record ratio of highs in late july of this year or the last one or the next one does not constitute proof of global warming idiot. BTW, is this a record high temp ratio? And if so as compared to what time frame? Last 100 years? last 20?

See socks, this is why you are the eco-joke you are here.... Mr. MENSA man...lol


----------



## westwall (Aug 1, 2011)

gslack said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> > gslack said:
> ...







I'm beginning to generate the belief that olfraudchriskonradtrollingblunder is incapable of _thinking_ on any level.  Their astounding scientific illiteracy is remarkable to behold.


----------



## ScienceRocks (Aug 2, 2011)

UAH July: +0.37C

From Spencer a devastating global warming skeptic like me.


----------



## Dabs (Aug 2, 2011)

No way in hell I'm going back thru 22 pages and reading what everyone's record temp was....according to the thread title anyway, that's what this is about.
I'll say that today, here in my part of the world, we hit 99 fucking degrees!!!!
I bet this is what hell almost feels like *ha*


----------



## Old Rocks (Aug 2, 2011)

Interesting. 0.37  So, coming off a strong La Nina, with a low TSI, the curve starts looking like it's headed for the same territory as 1998 and 2010.


----------



## RollingThunder (Aug 2, 2011)

More record temperatures.

*All 50 States See Record Highs in July*
YahooNews
8/1/11
(excerpts)

*No state in the union was safe from July's blistering heat wave, according to data from the U.S. National Climatic Data Center.

The horrible July heat wave, lasting weeks in some cities, the entire month in others, affected nearly 200 million people in the United States at some point. Preliminary data show that 2,712 high-temperature records were either tied or broken in July, compared with 1,444 last year, according to the NCDC. At least one weather station in all 50 states set or tied a daily high temperature record at some point during July.

Two weather stations tied for the hottest temperature recorded during July. The Blythe station in Riverside County, Calif., and the Gila Bend station in Maricopa County, Ariz., both hit 120 degrees Fahrenheit (48.9 degrees Celsius) in July.

Even Alaska recorded unusually sweaty temperatures. The temperature at the Northway weather station in Southeast Fairbanks County hit a record 97 F (36.1 C) on July 11.

Newark, N.J., set an all-time high at 108 F (42.2 C) on July 22, breaking the record of 105 F (40.6 C), set in 2001.

In Washington, D.C., Dulles International Airport saw its hottest July on record this year and recorded its highest July temperature of all time at 105 F (40.6 C), on July 22. That same day, water in the nearby Potomac River was the hottest ever recorded at 96 F (35.4 C)...*


----------



## gslack (Aug 2, 2011)

RollingThunder said:


> More record temperatures.
> 
> *All 50 States See Record Highs in July*
> YahooNews
> ...



AHHHHH weather!


----------



## Old Rocks (Aug 2, 2011)

AHHHHHH  dumbass.


----------



## westwall (Aug 2, 2011)

Old Rocks said:


> AHHHHHH  dumbass.








Ahhhhhh, silly person who believes crap pumped out like this.

This is the transcript of the interview of the Polar Bear King (as I am referring to him now) and in a wonderful example of just how crappy the AGW scientific methods are we have this persons admission that there is NO EVIDENCE for his claims of polar bear deaths.  In fact his "paper" (and I am using the term very loosely) was peer reviewed by his WIFE!


And you fools wonder why you are the laughing stock of the worlds thinking people.


http://www.peer.org/docs/doi/7_28_11_Monnett-IG_interview_transcript.pdf


----------



## Old Rocks (Aug 2, 2011)

Arctic Sea Ice News & Analysis

Polar Sea Ice Cap and Snow - Cryosphere Today

UAH Global Temperature Update July, 2011: +0.37 deg. C « Roy Spencer, Ph. D.

Arctic Ice August 2011

*And, of course, this cannot possibly be correct, can it?*

Arctic Ice Volume: Definitely Not Good News | The Energy Collective


----------



## gslack (Aug 2, 2011)

repeat the mantra....


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Aug 2, 2011)

"Global Warming? Fake? Fuckkkk. Does this mean I can get off this stupid iceberg now?"


----------



## daveman (Aug 2, 2011)

I mowed my grass yesterday evening.  So did my neighbor.

ZOMG!!  Global lawn care!!


----------



## Old Rocks (Aug 2, 2011)

gslack said:


> repeat the mantra....



Flap the dumb yap, demonstrate that you have nothing at all to say.


----------



## Old Rocks (Aug 2, 2011)

daveman said:


> I mowed my grass yesterday evening.  So did my neighbor.
> 
> ZOMG!!  Global lawn care!!



My goodness, you actually did something? Amazing


----------



## daveman (Aug 2, 2011)

Old Rocks said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > I mowed my grass yesterday evening.  So did my neighbor.
> ...



Yes, I did it myself.  I didn't need the government to do it for me.


----------



## gslack (Aug 2, 2011)

Old Rocks said:


> gslack said:
> 
> 
> > repeat the mantra....
> ...



Whats there to say? You repeat nonsense even after its disproved and lie on top of lie to cover it up...


----------



## Chris (Aug 2, 2011)

Record Events for Tue Jul 26, 2011 through Mon Aug 1, 2011 

High Temperatures: 559 
Low Temperatures: 47 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## Chris (Aug 2, 2011)

The death toll from Oklahoma's historic heat wave reached 11 on Tuesday after authorities announced two more deaths, and Wednesday's high temperature could break an all-time high.

The latest deaths were a 61-year-old man in Tulsa and a 65-year-old man in Hugo, both of whom died Monday, said Cherokee Ballard, spokeswoman for the state medical examiner's office. In addition to the 11 confirmed fatalities, authorities are investigating 10 other deaths where heat is suspected as a cause.

Monday's high temperature in Tulsa was 110 degrees, while Hugo had a high of 108. Ballard said the Hugo man did not have air conditioning. The spike in heat the last couple of days also caused an increase in heat-related 911 calls, said Lara O'Leary, spokeswoman for the Emergency Medical Services Authority.

Oklahoma City could set all-time record high temperature Wednesday | NewsOK.com


----------



## daveman (Aug 2, 2011)

I picked my only ripe tomato this evening.  Some kind of bug had been eating it.

ZOMG!  Global tomato-eating bug plague!


----------



## Chris (Aug 2, 2011)

Keep your AC cranking and water at your side, Oklahoma. The brutal heat and ongoing drought is showing no signs of stopping. The month of July became the hottest month ever on record in Oklahoma. The average temperature was 89.1 degrees, breaking the previous record of 88.1 degrees set in July 1954. As for rainfall, the count was 0.70 inches, more than 2 inches below normal. This resulted in July being the fourth driest July on record.

The Oklahoma heat is showing no signs of stopping anytime soon. The National Weather Service expects highs around 110 degrees for much of the state this week. The high temperatures have resulted in increased electric and water bills and a threat of wildfires across the state. 

July the Hottest Month Ever Recorded in Oklahoma | InjuryBoard Oklahoma City


----------



## ScienceRocks (Aug 2, 2011)

Chris said:


> Keep your AC cranking and water at your side, Oklahoma. The brutal heat and ongoing drought is showing no signs of stopping. The month of July became the hottest month ever on record in Oklahoma. The average temperature was 89.1 degrees, breaking the previous record of 88.1 degrees set in July 1954. As for rainfall, the count was 0.70 inches, more than 2 inches below normal. This resulted in July being the fourth driest July on record.
> 
> The Oklahoma heat is showing no signs of stopping anytime soon. The National Weather Service expects highs around 110 degrees for much of the state this week. The high temperatures have resulted in increased electric and water bills and a threat of wildfires across the state.
> 
> July the Hottest Month Ever Recorded in Oklahoma | InjuryBoard Oklahoma City



This heat wave was caused by the SUN.






Here is a special picture of the sun.

Learn about the sun
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_sun


----------



## RollingThunder (Aug 3, 2011)

Matthew said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > Keep your AC cranking and water at your side, Oklahoma. The brutal heat and ongoing drought is showing no signs of stopping. The month of July became the hottest month ever on record in Oklahoma. The average temperature was 89.1 degrees, breaking the previous record of 88.1 degrees set in July 1954. As for rainfall, the count was 0.70 inches, more than 2 inches below normal. This resulted in July being the fourth driest July on record.
> ...



The sun's output has not changed. The Earth is still receiving the same amount of energy from the sun. The reason the temperatures are going up is that the extra CO2 in the atmosphere is retaining more of the sun's energy.

Denier cult myth - "It's the sun"

*What the science says*:

*Until about 1960, measurements by scientists showed that the brightness and warmth of the sun, as seen from the Earth, was increasing. Over the same period temperature measurements of the air and sea showed that the Earth was gradually warming. It was not surprising therefore for most scientists to put two and two together and assume that it was the warming sun that was increasing the temperature of our planet.

However, between the 1960s and the present day the same solar measurements have shown that the energy from the sun is now decreasing. At the same time temperature measurements of the air and sea have shown that the Earth has continued to become warmer and warmer. This proves that it cannot be the sun; something else must be causing the Earth's temperature to rise.





Figure 1: Global temperature (red, NASA GISS) and Total solar irradiance (blue, 1880 to 1978 from Solanki, 1979 to 2009 from PMOD).

So, while there is no credible science indicating that the sun is causing the observed increase in global temperature, it's the known physical properties of greenhouse gasses that provide us with the only real and measurable explanation of global warming. *

(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.)


----------



## gslack (Aug 3, 2011)

RollingThunder said:


> Matthew said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...



I have already showed this to be a fallacy that is not only misleading, but the attempt by some scientists to try and use merely sunspot activity and an 11 year cycle to verify their AGW theory is a fine example of how this is a case of "do whatever it takes to get this established fact".

There is a lot more to the suns part in our climate than a mere 11 year sunspot cycle. IF you continue trying to make this claim I WILL go back and dig up my posts on this subject and my old links and sources to scientific bodies and groups (NASA, etc) that will tell you with clear evidence of this....

Matter of fact I believe we already showed this exact same chart to be misleading in this thread...


----------



## Chris (Aug 4, 2011)

Dallas (CNN) -- A spell of suffocating heat continued to grip much of the South Thursday, as several cities in Texas closed in on records for the most consecutive days of 100-degree heat. 

In all, the National Weather Service issued heat advisories for parts of 15 states stretching from a sliver of Southern California to North Carolina. 

Dallas marked its 34th straight day of temperatures above 100 degrees. That city has been getting a lot of attention for its hellish heat, but some smaller Texas cities have had it worse. Thursday was Waco's 35th straight day topping 100 degrees, and Tyler's 38th. The record for both Dallas and Waco is 42 straight days, set in 1980.

Heat spell extends another day in southern U.S. - CNN.com


----------



## Chris (Aug 4, 2011)

Record Events for Thu Jul 28, 2011 through Wed Aug 3, 2011 

High Temperatures: 951 
Low Temperatures: 38 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## RollingThunder (Aug 4, 2011)

gslack said:


> RollingThunder said:
> 
> 
> > Matthew said:
> ...



On the contrary, slackjawed, the only thing you have ever shown on this forum is how ignorant, misinformed and brainwashed you are. All the rest of your rant is just more of your delusions.


----------



## uscitizen (Aug 4, 2011)

It was 10 below today in Kentucky.


----------



## BDBoop (Aug 4, 2011)

What I don't get is that we could tan using baby oil in the 70's, and if we tried that today, 3rd degree burns would likely result. Buuuut nothing's changed.


----------



## Meister (Aug 4, 2011)

The Sun Does not have a constant temperature...it does vary for a number of reasons.  I agree that the Earth IS warming up.  I disagree that it is caused by Man.  roiling timber, roxie, trakar, and chris are the believers of the new religious cult....along with the other socialists and communists that have gravitated to the cult.  When they have to use bogus science to get their results, it's a dead giveaway.


----------



## RollingThunder (Aug 5, 2011)

Meister said:


> The Sun Does not have a constant temperature...it does vary for a number of reasons.  I agree that the Earth IS warming up.  I disagree that it is caused by Man.  roiling timber, roxie, trakar, and chris are the believers of the new religious cult....along with the other socialists and communists that have gravitated to the cult.  When they have to use bogus science to get their results, it's a dead giveaway.



You poor deluded nutjob. The only bogus science being pushed on the public in this matter is the stuff coming from you denier cultists and your fossil fuel industry puppet masters.


----------



## westwall (Aug 5, 2011)

RollingThunder said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> > The Sun Does not have a constant temperature...it does vary for a number of reasons.  I agree that the Earth IS warming up.  I disagree that it is caused by Man.  roiling timber, roxie, trakar, and chris are the believers of the new religious cult....along with the other socialists and communists that have gravitated to the cult.  When they have to use bogus science to get their results, it's a dead giveaway.
> ...







Oh, junior.  You make it too easy.  Which American company was most heavily involved in the AGW supporters wet dream in Kyoto?  If you weren't such a delusional dingbat such as yourself, you'd know that ENRON was the company.  You remember them?  I doubt it.  You're to wacked out on the magic shrooms to think much it seems.


----------



## gslack (Aug 5, 2011)

RollingThunder said:


> gslack said:
> 
> 
> > RollingThunder said:
> ...



Ok tool you asked to be embarrassed again, who am I to deny you..

Solar variation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



> Solar cycles
> Main article: Solar cycle
> 
> *11 years: *Most obvious is a gradual increase and more rapid decrease of the number of sunspots over a period ranging from 9 to 12 years, called the Schwabe cycle, named after Heinrich Schwabe. Differential rotation of the sun's convection zone (as a function of latitude) consolidates magnetic flux tubes, increases their magnetic field strength and makes them buoyant (see Babcock Model). As they rise through the solar atmosphere they partially block the convective flow of energy, cooling their region of the photosphere, causing 'sunspots'. The Sun's apparent surface, the photosphere, radiates more actively when there are more sunspots. Satellite monitoring of solar luminosity since 1980 has shown there is a direct relationship between the solar activity (sunspot) cycle and luminosity with a solar cycle peak-to-peak amplitude of about 0.1 %.[2] Luminosity has also been found to decrease by as much as 0.3 % on a 10 day timescale when large groups of sunspots rotate across the Earth's view and increase by as much as 0.05 % for up to 6 months due to faculae associated with the large sunspot groups.[24]
> ...



There is a small sample of the big picture.. 11 year sunspot cycles are only one small part in this, yet you algorians try and pretend it is the only factor outside CO2 and negates the suns role in climate change. You idiots take one little piece of a very large part of science and claim you are using science. Pathetic..


----------



## RollingThunder (Aug 5, 2011)

westwall said:


> RollingThunder said:
> 
> 
> > Meister said:
> ...



Oh, walleyedretard, you are such a delusional nutjob. Enron figured to make money on carbon trading. Enron was a electricity, coal and natural gas wholesaler but not a direct producer. Their failed financial maneuvering has nothing to do with the documented support from the fossil fuel industry for the anti-science, anti-AGW propaganda.

*Exxon Keeps Funding Anti-Global Warming Lobbyists 

Exxon's funding of climate skeptics

Report: Koch Industries outspends Exxon Mobil on climate and clean energy disinformation

Think-tanks take oil money and use it to fund climate deniers*


----------



## westwall (Aug 5, 2011)

RollingThunder said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > RollingThunder said:
> ...







Did you know that the Koch brothers are funders of BEST too?  No, I didn't think so.  Poor junior.  Reduced to juvenile insults to try and feel good about yourself.  When you grow up you can come back.


----------



## RollingThunder (Aug 5, 2011)

westwall said:


> RollingThunder said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...



Oh walleyed, you poor retarded dingbat. Reduced to obscure, meaningless claims to defend your debunked nonsense. When you grow a brain, you can come back.


----------



## Chris (Aug 5, 2011)

Record Events for Fri Jul 29, 2011 through Thu Aug 4, 2011 

High Temperatures: 1134 
Low Temperatures: 32 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## Chris (Aug 5, 2011)

Dallas (CNN) -- Another day, another assault on the air conditioning systems of America.

A spell of suffocating heat will grip much of the South again Friday. Heat advisories are in place for parts of 14 states. People from New Mexico to North Carolina will feel the extreme heat, according to the National Weather Service.

The developments come as several cities in Texas closed in on records for the most consecutive days of 100-degree heat. 

On Thursday, Dallas marked its 34th straight day of temperatures above 100 degrees. That city has been getting a lot of attention for its hellish heat, but some smaller Texas cities have had it worse. Thursday was Waco's 35th straight day topping 100 degrees, and it marked Tyler's 38th. The record for both Dallas and Waco is 42 straight days over three digits, set in 1980.

In some places, the heat is having deadly consequences. 

Blazing temperatures scorch much of southern U.S. - CNN.com


----------



## westwall (Aug 5, 2011)

RollingThunder said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > RollingThunder said:
> ...







Nahh, I actually present cogent arguments.  You on the other hand hurl insults like a petulant child.  My turds have more brain power then you ever will junior.


----------



## Old Rocks (Aug 5, 2011)

westwall said:


> RollingThunder said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...



Yep. And they are totally displeased that Muller played it straight. That wasn't what they expected for their money.


----------



## westwall (Aug 5, 2011)

Old Rocks said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > RollingThunder said:
> ...







Really?  When did you learn how to read minds?


----------



## Old Rocks (Aug 5, 2011)

westwall said:


> RollingThunder said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...



Now that is what Walleyes calls a cogent arguement.


----------



## westwall (Aug 5, 2011)

Old Rocks said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > RollingThunder said:
> ...







Nope, just an analogy of what trolling blunder uses for brains.  Similar to you as well.


----------



## uscitizen (Aug 5, 2011)

RollingThunder said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > RollingThunder said:
> ...



And obviously the spending works on a lot of easially purchased minds.


----------



## Old Rocks (Aug 5, 2011)

HAMweather Climate Center - Record Events for The Past Week - Continental US View

Record Events for Fri Jul 29, 2011 through Thu Aug 4, 2011 
Total Records: 3108 
Rainfall: 492 
High Temperatures: 1134 
Low Temperatures: 32 
Lowest Max Temperatures: 61 
Highest Min Temperatures: 1389 

*Note the highest min. temperature. Very significant, because that means a lot less cooling at night. Humidity and CO2 letting less IR out at night.*


----------



## Old Rocks (Aug 5, 2011)

westwall said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...



*Don't have to, their paid lapdog, Anthony Watts, has already castigated Muller.*

Experts Heat Up Over Berkeley Lab Scientist's Quest to 'Calm' Climate Change Debate - NYTimes.com

"There seems a bit of a rush here, as BEST hasn't completed all of their promised data techniques that would be able to remove the different kinds of data biases we've noted," Watts wrote on his blog yesterday. "That was the promise, that is why I signed on (to share my data and collaborate with them). Yet somehow, much of that has been thrown out the window, and they are presenting some results today without the full set of techniques applied." 

Watts went on to characterize the BEST study's early findings as "post-normal political theater." 

In an interview after the hearing, Muller said Watts' criticism was somewhat perplexing. 

"I didn't feel there was a big disagreement there, but he did," Muller said, referring to the Berkeley study's preliminary results and Watts' latest, as-yet-unpublished analysis of weather station data, which he had previously shared with Muller's team. 

Meanwhile, climate scientists said they weren't surprised that Muller's group produced a land-surface temperature reconstruction very similar to the records maintained by NOAA, NASA and the Hadley Centre. 

"Muller's conclusions are completely in line with many previous results -- from interested amateurs and professionals alike," NASA climate scientist Gavin Schmidt wrote on a live-blog of the House hearing published by the journal Science. "I doubt very much whether this means that people will stop claiming that there are problems

*And there is the funding of the project;*

But yesterday wasn't the first time the BEST effort has come under scrutiny. Joe Romm, a senior fellow at the liberal Center for American Progress, has called into question the study's funders, which include the Charles G. Koch Charitable Foundation -- which has supported efforts opposing mainstream climate change science. 

The Berkeley study effort, overseen by the nonprofit Novim Group, has raised $623,087. Muller said that would be enough fund one and a half years of operations for the study, which started roughly a year ago. 

The U.S. Department of Energy's Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory has contributed the largest chunk of cash, $188,587. The Koch foundation contributed another $150,000, and the effort received $100,000 each from the William K. Bowes Jr. Foundation and the Fund for Innovative Climate and Energy Research (started by Microsoft founder Bill Gates). 

The Ann & Gordon Getty Foundation has contributed $50,000, and private individuals have given a total of $14,500. 

Raising the cash was slow going, according to Muller, who said it took him about seven months to secure the initial funding from Berkeley Lab. At one point, study team member Art Rosenfeld, a physicist and former California Energy Commissioner, floated the project a loan to pay the salary of its only full-time employee, postdoctoral researcher Robert Rohde.


----------



## gslack (Aug 5, 2011)

Yawn!....


----------



## RollingThunder (Aug 5, 2011)

westwall said:


> RollingThunder said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...



I've always suspected that you were using turds instead of brains to formulate your arguments ('cause it's so obvious from your braindead posts) but thanks for confirming it, walleyed..... LOLOLOLOLOL......you poor deluded retard.


----------



## westwall (Aug 5, 2011)

RollingThunder said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > RollingThunder said:
> ...


----------



## Big Fitz (Aug 5, 2011)

When will this poor deluded rag of a thread finally get dragged into the Romper Room where it fucking belongs?


----------



## RollingThunder (Aug 5, 2011)

westwall said:


> RollingThunder said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...




_*Lead (sea ice)*
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia_

*Leads are stretches of open water within fields of sea ice.[1] Leads are caused by movements of the ice due to wind, or to currents in the underlying water, and may open and close again within a brief period; alternatively they may remain open more or less permanently. The so-called "Big Lead", off the North Greenland coast, was discovered in 1906 by Robert Peary on his first (unsuccessful) North Polar trek, and was still there when he made his second attempt in 1909.*


Notice carefully the last item in this encyclopedia entry.

_*Polynya*
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia_

*A polynya (common US spelling) or polynia (common UK spelling) (pronounced /p&#601;&#712;l&#618;nj&#601;/) is an area of open water surrounded by sea ice.[1] It is now used as geographical term for areas of sea in Arctic or Antarctic regions which remain unfrozen for much of the year. It is a loanword from Russian: &#1087;&#1086;&#1083;&#1099;&#1085;&#1100;&#1103;, Russian pronunciation: [p&#601;l&#616;&#712;n&#690;ja] (polynya or polynia), which means a natural ice hole, and was adopted in the 19th century by polar explorers to describe navigable portions of the sea.[2][3] In past decades, for example, some polynyas, such as the Weddell Polynya, have lasted over multiple winters (19741976).[4]

Contents
    * 1 Formation
    * 2 Ecology
    * 3 Arctic navigation

Formation

Polynyas are formed through two main processes:

    * The first mechanism for polynya formation is thermodynamically driven, and occurs when the surface water temperature never reaches the freezing point. This may be due to a region of warm water upwelling, which reduces ice production and may stop it altogether. This type of polynya is called a Sensible Heat Polynya.

    * The second type of polynya is called a Latent Heat Polynya and is formed through the action of katabatic wind or ocean currents which act to drive ice away from a fixed boundary, such as a coastline, fast ice, or an ice bridge. The polynya forms initially by the first year pack ice being driven away from the coast, which leaves an area of open water within which new ice is formed. This new ice is then also herded downwind toward the first year pack ice. When it reaches the pack ice the new ice is consolidated onto the first year pack ice. The latent heat polynya is the open water region between the coast and the first year ice pack.

Latent heat polynyas are regions of high ice production and therefore are possible sites of dense water production in both polar regions. The high ice production rates within these polynyas leads to a large amount of brine rejection into the surface waters. This salty water then sinks and mixes to possibly form new water masses. It is an open question as to whether the polynyas of the Arctic can produce enough dense water to form a major portion of the dense water required to drive the thermohaline circulation.

Arctic navigation

When submarines of the U.S. Navy made expeditions to the North Pole in the 1950s and 60s, there was a significant concern about surfacing through the thick pack ice of the Arctic Ocean. In 1962, both the USS Skate and USS Seadragon surfaced within the same, large polynya near the North Pole, for the first polar rendezvous of the U.S. Atlantic Fleet and the U.S. Pacific Fleet.[6]*


***


----------



## RollingThunder (Aug 5, 2011)

Big Fitz said:


> When will this poor deluded rag of a thread finally get dragged into the Romper Room where it fucking belongs?



When will your pathetic excuse for a brain finally get dragged into the septic tank where it fucking belongs?


----------



## gslack (Aug 6, 2011)

RollingThunder said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > RollingThunder said:
> ...



Yes yes repeat the same things over and over to hide the fact it was already bashed to smithereens a page or two ago...

Posting bullshit already disproven again and again doesn't make it less bullshit..

Okay a serious question now... What else do you do but post AGW propaganda?


----------



## westwall (Aug 6, 2011)

gslack said:


> RollingThunder said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...






They post nothing but discredited drivel of course!


----------



## gslack (Aug 6, 2011)

westwall said:


> gslack said:
> 
> 
> > RollingThunder said:
> ...



I think he just needs a hug....


----------



## westwall (Aug 6, 2011)

gslack said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > gslack said:
> ...







Hugs are definately underated.


----------



## gslack (Aug 6, 2011)

westwall said:


> gslack said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...



Well I'm not gonna hug him... And pretty sure not gonna either.... I know KORNHOLEV will do it! Oh yeah he will hug the shit out of him...


----------



## westwall (Aug 6, 2011)

gslack said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > gslack said:
> ...







Well they are very _special_ friends you know!


----------



## gslack (Aug 6, 2011)

westwall said:


> gslack said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...


----------



## RollingThunder (Aug 6, 2011)

gslack said:


> RollingThunder said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...


Only in your demented dreams, slackjawedidiot. I challenge you to point to exactly which post "_bashed_" anything to "_smithereens_", you retarded nitwit. The existence of polynyas in the Arctic ice cap due to wind and wave action is an established scientific fact, moron.





gslack said:


> Posting bullshit already disproven again and again doesn't make it less bullshit..


Wise words that you and the walleyedretard should heed. Your willingness to make fools out of yourselves by repeatedly posting thoroughly debunked denier cult bullshit is hilarious but also very pathetic.


----------



## gslack (Aug 6, 2011)

RollingThunder said:


> gslack said:
> 
> 
> > RollingThunder said:
> ...



So then you deny this was already posted and gone over before?



Oh please deny this so we can once again show you for the pathetic lying weasel you are..


----------



## Old Rocks (Aug 6, 2011)

Yep, posted and gone over. And showed what total lying idiots you and Walleyes are.

Flap yap all you care too. For all you have posted to support your case thus far is discredited political screeds from political sites. So show us something from real scientists that are currently doing research. You know, the people from AGU, the Royal Society, USGS, NOAA, NASA, or anyone with real scientific credentials. Hell, even the sceptic Dr. Roy Spencers site shows rapid warming. And everybodies data shows the rapid melting of the Arctic Ice.

All you fellows have is a political denial of reality.


----------



## Old Rocks (Aug 7, 2011)

*Going over the rainfall records, many are doubling or more the previous records for the first week of August. And the highest minimum temps once again are showing a nighttime warming that exceeds that of the daytime warming. So the air is contains more water vapor, 24/7. And the Missouri and Mississippi are still in flood.*


HAMweather Climate Center - Record Events for The Past Week - Continental US View

Record Events for Sun Jul 31, 2011 through Sat Aug 6, 2011 
Total Records: 3393 
Rainfall: 459 
High Temperatures: 1303 
Low Temperatures: 43 
Lowest Max Temperatures: 63 
Highest Min Temperatures: 1525


----------



## Meister (Aug 7, 2011)

Old Rocks said:


> Yep, posted and gone over. And showed what total lying idiots you and Walleyes are.
> 
> Flap yap all you care too. For all you have posted to support your case thus far is discredited political screeds from political sites. So show us something from real scientists that are currently doing research. You know, the people from AGU, the Royal Society, USGS, NOAA, NASA, or anyone with real scientific credentials. Hell, even the sceptic Dr. Roy Spencers site shows rapid warming. And everybodies data shows the rapid melting of the Arctic Ice.
> 
> All you fellows have is a political denial of reality.


What a total buffoon you are, roxie.  Go back to algorian religion, moron.


----------



## westwall (Aug 7, 2011)

Old Rocks said:


> Yep, posted and gone over. And showed what total lying idiots you and Walleyes are.
> 
> Flap yap all you care too. For all you have posted to support your case thus far is discredited political screeds from political sites. So show us something from real scientists that are currently doing research. You know, the people from AGU, the Royal Society, USGS, NOAA, NASA, or anyone with real scientific credentials. Hell, even the sceptic Dr. Roy Spencers site shows rapid warming. And everybodies data shows the rapid melting of the Arctic Ice.
> 
> All you fellows have is a political denial of reality.








Sure MENSA boy sure....

*
even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is*


----------



## Chris (Aug 7, 2011)

Almost 9,000 daily records were broken or tied last month, including 2,755 highest maximum temperatures and 6,171 highest minimum temperatures (night-time records), reported the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).

NOAA indicated, however, that the tally of records collected so far is not complete  more are expected to come in as station data from across the U.S. is forwarded to the National Climatic Data Center. It said the statistics reported on the its temperature map only include weather stations with real-time electronic reporting, which accounts for about two-thirds of the locations. Final numbers are expected to be made available later in August.

The above image plots how many times a heat record was broken or tied in a given location. Some cities reached daily high temperatures 19 out of the 31 days in the month. The largest concentration of these records occur in the southern Plains, Midwest, and Northeast U.S., which were gripped by a series of heat waves pushing heat indices well into the 100s (Fahrenheit) for many days at a time.

Record July Temperatures In US Documented In NOAA Map - Irish Weather Online


----------



## daveman (Aug 7, 2011)

Remember, folks:

One month of cold temperatures in the winter does not disprove global warming.

But one month of hot temperatures in the summer proves it.


----------



## Chris (Aug 7, 2011)

daveman said:


> Remember, folks:
> 
> One month of cold temperatures in the winter does not disprove global warming.
> 
> But one month of hot temperatures in the summer proves it.



Show me a month in the winter where we had 9,000 record lows.

I'm waiting....


----------



## Rat in the Hat (Aug 7, 2011)

Why is it that record high temperatures in the US means global climate change, but record snowfalls in the US are only local weather events?


----------



## Chris (Aug 7, 2011)

Rat in the Hat said:


> Why is it that record high temperatures in the US means global climate change, but record snowfalls in the US are only local weather events?



Actually record snowfalls are the result of higher humidity caused by global warming.

The temperature of the oceans is at a record high, and this creates more humidity.

Thanks for bringing that up.


----------



## Chris (Aug 7, 2011)

Meister said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> > Yep, posted and gone over. And showed what total lying idiots you and Walleyes are.
> ...



When the facts are on your side, argue the facts.

When the law is on your side, argue the law.

When you have neither, bang on the table.

You just banged on the table.


----------



## Rat in the Hat (Aug 7, 2011)

Chris said:


> Rat in the Hat said:
> 
> 
> > Why is it that record high temperatures in the US means global climate change, but record snowfalls in the US are only local weather events?
> ...



You need cold to make snow, so record snowfalls in the US prove global cooling.


----------



## Chris (Aug 7, 2011)

Rat in the Hat said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > Rat in the Hat said:
> ...



Sorry, the temperature records don't back up your statement.

Go ahead and research them and get back to me.

Find a month where we had 9,000 record lows.


----------



## Rat in the Hat (Aug 7, 2011)

You know, I'm having trouble finding any stories from the rest of the world about their having 9,000 record high temperatures.

Is the US global now?


----------



## daveman (Aug 7, 2011)

Chris said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Remember, folks:
> ...


It's funny, the way you desperately claim "weather" is "climate". 

Poor, deluded fool.


----------



## daveman (Aug 7, 2011)

Rat in the Hat said:


> You know, I'm having trouble finding any stories from the rest of the world about their having 9,000 record high temperatures.
> 
> Is the US global now?


You didn't get the memo?  American weather = global climate.  

At least among idiots.


----------



## The Infidel (Aug 7, 2011)

Chris said:


> Rat in the Hat said:
> 
> 
> > Why is it that record high temperatures in the US means global climate change, but record snowfalls in the US are only local weather events?
> ...





You are so full of shit!

Record amounts of shit falling taday.... 9,001 records to be exact


----------



## RetiredGySgt (Aug 7, 2011)

Chris said:


> Almost 9,000 daily records were broken or tied last month, including 2,755 highest maximum temperatures and 6,171 highest minimum temperatures (night-time records), reported the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).
> 
> NOAA indicated, however, that the tally of records collected so far is not complete  more are expected to come in as station data from across the U.S. is forwarded to the National Climatic Data Center. It said the statistics reported on the its temperature map only include weather stations with real-time electronic reporting, which accounts for about two-thirds of the locations. Final numbers are expected to be made available later in August.
> 
> ...



How many record cold temps were there in December and January and February? Ohh wait, that's right you claimed back then that US temps didn't matter.


----------



## Meister (Aug 7, 2011)

Chris said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> > Old Rocks said:
> ...



And your the town dufus, Christine.  When you have to argue with your tainted facts you get what you get.  Take the political funding out of "your facts", and we may end up with the real facts. Now get back to your cult for your next talking points.


----------



## BDBoop (Aug 7, 2011)

Meister said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > Meister said:
> ...



Christine? So - being female is an insult? How misogynistic.


----------



## Si modo (Aug 7, 2011)

BDBoop said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...


Not at all.  Chris whines like a little girl, so it works.


----------



## Chris (Aug 7, 2011)

RetiredGySgt said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > Almost 9,000 daily records were broken or tied last month, including 2,755 highest maximum temperatures and 6,171 highest minimum temperatures (night-time records), reported the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).
> ...



I didn't claim any such thing.

Go ahead and research it, and get back to me when you come up with 9,000 record lows in one month.


----------



## Chris (Aug 7, 2011)

Wow, you guys have really run out of ammo.

2,900 record highs just in the last week....

Record Events for Sun Jul 31, 2011 through Sat Aug 6, 2011 
Total Records: 3520 
Rainfall: 484 
High Temperatures: 1330 
Low Temperatures: 46 
Lowest Max Temperatures: 64 
Highest Min Temperatures: 1596 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## Meister (Aug 7, 2011)

Chris said:


> Wow, you guys have really run out of ammo.
> 
> 2,900 record highs just in the last week....
> 
> ...



Now, if you could honestly connect the dots from those record temps, and man made global warming, or climate change, or what ever is the flavor this month.  I would really be impressed, but you can't.


----------



## Chris (Aug 7, 2011)

Meister said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > Wow, you guys have really run out of ammo.
> ...



Of course we can.

The Sun is at its lowest level of activity in 80 years, and yet we have record heat.

Why?


----------



## Meister (Aug 7, 2011)

Chris said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...



You connected no dots, Chris.


----------



## daveman (Aug 7, 2011)

BDBoop said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...


Keep your eyes open.  You'll see plenty of leftists doing the same thing.

Well...actually, you probably won't.


----------



## westwall (Aug 7, 2011)

Chris said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...






And CO2 content of the atmosphere has been higher then the current day.  How do you figure that?  And CO2 increases hundreds of years after the warming occurs as proven by the Vostock ice cores how do reconcile that?  CO2 content has been at a high level with no corresponding increase in temperature as proven by paleoclimate records from all over the world. How do you reconcile that?

During the MWP wine grapes could be grown 300 miles further north then they can be today as documented in the Domesday Book how is that possible?

You've got a lot more questions to answer then us.


----------



## gslack (Aug 7, 2011)

Old Rocks said:


> Yep, posted and gone over. And showed what total lying idiots you and Walleyes are.
> 
> Flap yap all you care too. For all you have posted to support your case thus far is discredited political screeds from political sites. So show us something from real scientists that are currently doing research. You know, the people from AGU, the Royal Society, USGS, NOAA, NASA, or anyone with real scientific credentials. Hell, even the sceptic Dr. Roy Spencers site shows rapid warming. And everybodies data shows the rapid melting of the Arctic Ice.
> 
> All you fellows have is a political denial of reality.



Okay fool you asked for this....

1. The original contention was that man made carbon dioxide is causing an out of control warming by exaggerating the CO2 greenhouse gas effect. As in we make more CO2 and the CO2 causes more warming through its natural greenhouse effect properties.

Correct? Why yes of course that has been your contention since i have been on this forum.

2. As a result of your CO2 induced global warming theory, your side has continually made the claims that the arctic ice is melting more, faster, and grows for a longer period as well as getting thinner and so on.

Correct? Why yes again this has been your sides claims to date.

3. In a counter to your sides claims of warming induced ice loss, my side contended that the ice melted more or worse or the same amounts in the recent and not too recent past. One of their pieces of evidence was submarines surfacing in the arctic among ice back in the 1950's.

Correct? Why yes we can easily look back and see that here....

4. In a defense your side contended that the surfacing submarines was made possible by "leads" or "polynyas" a naturally occurring thing which is generally caused by warmer ocean currents and anomalies in a given area of ice, where the ice melts in a small or given area of larger ice.

Correct? Why yes because you just tried to do it again here...

5. I ask again just as I asked before when you tried this crap, what caused the warming or anomalies in the first place? According to your own posted info it is a naturally occurring thing and NOT caused by AGW. So then IF this can be a naturally occurring thing even in midst of severe cold, then it is perfectly logical to make the argument that making claims of CO2 induced melting, is just as unreliable a claim as the subs surfacing in the past showed there was less ice back then....

I know its a hard thing trying to think multi-dimensional when your tiny little single dimension mind is already on overload, but please try and keep up..


----------



## daveman (Aug 7, 2011)

gslack said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> > Yep, posted and gone over. And showed what total lying idiots you and Walleyes are.
> ...


----------



## Chris (Aug 8, 2011)

Still waiting for that post, Dave.

Record Events for Mon Aug 1, 2011 through Sun Aug 7, 2011 
Total Records: 3548 
Rainfall: 479 
High Temperatures: 1350 
Low Temperatures: 46 
Lowest Max Temperatures: 52 
Highest Min Temperatures: 1621 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## westwall (Aug 8, 2011)

Chris said:


> Still waiting for that post, Dave.
> 
> Record Events for Mon Aug 1, 2011 through Sun Aug 7, 2011
> Total Records: 3548
> ...







Answer these questions first why don't you.

And CO2 content of the atmosphere has been higher then the current day. How do you figure that? And CO2 increases hundreds of years after the warming occurs as proven by the Vostock ice cores how do reconcile that? CO2 content has been at a high level with no corresponding increase in temperature as proven by paleoclimate records from all over the world. How do you reconcile that?

During the MWP wine grapes could be grown 300 miles further north then they can be today as documented in the Domesday Book how is that possible?

You've got a lot more questions to answer then us.


----------



## gslack (Aug 8, 2011)

I find it utterly hilarious that these algorian zealots cry science at every turn and then when faced with science they either A) turn into blind non-readers who can't see it. B) Pretend that science is somehow less science then their science. or C ) Go into a fit of rage and call everyone stupid... Yet they tell us its not a religion or a faith...

1. Last year they made the claim that CO2 saturating the oceans was going to make them acidic. Turns out that was dead wrong so now they conveniently pretend it didn't happen.

2. Al Gore claimed science told him if Greenland ice melted it would raise the sea level 7 meters. That was a lie and not even close to the truth.

3. They contend that the temperatures are raising globally and out of control, and have done so for a while now. Yet that does not show on any verifiable data even that which comes from their own backers.

4. They blame weather, natural disasters, storms, and almost anything one can think of on global warming with circumstantial or even false evidence that would get them contempt charges in a court of law.

5. They intentionally left out warming and cooling periods that would give a more accurate depiction of temperature over the last 1000 years.

6. They intentionally failed to mention that there have been higher temps AND higher concentrations of CO2 in the past that the planet recovered from and even allowed the planet to sustain the eco-system we have today.

7. They deliberately misled people to believe that CO2 CAUSED warming in the past when in reality the evidence shows that CO2 rise was an EFFECT of the warming. Often the time difference between temp increase and CO2 increase was 400 or more years.

8. They habitually misrepresent data and findings to give a false scenario and use scary headlines to invoke a fear response in people.

9. They broadcast inaccurate preliminary data readings all over the media and make bold claims on it, and when they are shown to be inaccurate and their bold claims to be false they quietly print an attachment or correction often in a separate paper and do not release anything about it to the media.

10. They intentionally disregard the sun role in climate simply because they cannot make a computer model which can accurately depict the suns influence at any level even close to reality. They admitted as much and still make their claims...

And whats worse is they know all of these to be the case, yet they keep right on preaching to the zealots like nothings wrong.

And the functionally mentally handicapped go on worshiping this false religion like sheep...


----------



## daveman (Aug 8, 2011)

Chris said:


> Still waiting for that post, Dave.



You say, "Jump!", I say, "Eat shit!"

We get it, Chris.  Hot weather is proof of global warming.  Cold weather is just weather.

You've got your closed little mind made up, and nothing's gonna keep you from bitterly clinging to your faith.  

So I'll just continue to make fun of you, if that's okay with you.  And even if it isn't.


----------



## Chris (Aug 9, 2011)

Record Events for Tue Aug 2, 2011 through Mon Aug 8, 2011 
Total Records: 3907 
Rainfall: 512 
High Temperatures: 1410 
Low Temperatures: 46 
Lowest Max Temperatures: 39 
Highest Min Temperatures: 1900 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View

Still waiting on proof of those 9,000 record lows, Dave.


----------



## westwall (Aug 9, 2011)

Chris said:


> Record Events for Tue Aug 2, 2011 through Mon Aug 8, 2011
> Total Records: 3907
> Rainfall: 512
> High Temperatures: 1410
> ...







Still waiting for you to answer my questions.  As usual we get the sound of crickets chirping from you when the questions involve observed data, and not computer models or "adjusted" temperature records.


----------



## highway234 (Aug 9, 2011)

skookerasbil said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > Record Events for Mon Mar 14, 2011 through Sun Mar 20, 2011
> ...


----------



## gslack (Aug 9, 2011)

highway234 said:


> skookerasbil said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...


----------



## Chris (Aug 9, 2011)

Record Events for Tue Aug 2, 2011 through Mon Aug 8, 2011 
Total Records: 4035 
Rainfall: 525 
High Temperatures: 1451 
Low Temperatures: 50 
Lowest Max Temperatures: 41 
Highest Min Temperatures: 1968 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## skookerasbil (Aug 9, 2011)

Chris said:


> Record Events for Tue Aug 2, 2011 through Mon Aug 8, 2011
> Total Records: 4035
> Rainfall: 525
> High Temperatures: 1451
> ...





Cherry picked data is gay.................

And by the way.......you'd get the same gay #'s if you picked these in 1920, 1945, 1973 or 1994 = gay


http://seeker401.wordpress.com/2010/08/24/noaa-caught-in-temperature-fraud-satellitegate-will-deliver-a-new-blow-to-the-agw-scam/


----------



## Big Fitz (Aug 9, 2011)

> because the big money would like to keep polluting



Oi!  Shit for brains. Pollution is not climatology.  CO2 is naturally occurring pollution now?  Is that what you're trying to say?  Well the EPA better start fining animals then!


----------



## Big Fitz (Aug 9, 2011)

skookerasbil said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > Record Events for Tue Aug 2, 2011 through Mon Aug 8, 2011
> ...


Which one is Olecrotchs?  The king?  Hail on the king, baby!


----------



## westwall (Aug 10, 2011)

highway234 said:


> skookerasbil said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...


----------



## Chris (Aug 10, 2011)

Record Events for Wed Aug 3, 2011 through Tue Aug 9, 2011 
Total Records: 3868 
Rainfall: 551 
High Temperatures: 1302 
Low Temperatures: 52 
Lowest Max Temperatures: 49 
Highest Min Temperatures: 1914 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## Chris (Aug 10, 2011)

Oklahoma Climatological Survey

Grover Cleveland was serving his second term as President in 1895. Victoria was the Queen of England and Will Rogers was still a teenager. It is also the year that statewide average temperature records begin for the United States. There have been 1399 months pass by since 1895. Multiply that number by 48 and you have 67,152 months of temperature records for the contiguous states. How hot was it in Oklahoma last month? Of those statewide average temperature records for the 48 states, none has been hotter than July 2011 in Oklahoma.

According to data from the Oklahoma Mesonet, the statewide average temperature during July came in at 89.1 degrees, more than 7 degrees above normal. High temperatures alone were nearly 9 degrees above normal at 102.9 degrees. The National Climatic Data Centers statewide average for July stands at 88.9 degrees with data still being collected. Both values shattered the countrys previous record of 88.1 degrees held by another legendary hot month in Oklahoma, July 1954.

Oklahoma July warmest on record for U.S. - BixbyBulletin.com : News


----------



## IanC (Aug 10, 2011)

> State high temperature records
> State    Temp    Date          Station                   Elevation (feet) Ala.     112   Sept. 5, 1925   Centerville               345 Alaska   100   June 27, 1915   Ft. Yukon                 420* Ariz.    128   June 29, 1994   Lake Havasu               505Ark.     120   Aug. 10, 1936   Ozark                     396Calif.   134   July 10, 1913   Death Valley              N/A Colo.    118   July 11, 1888   Bennett                   5,484Conn.    106   July 15, 1995   Danbury                   450Del.     110   July 21, 1930   Millsboro                 20Fla.     109   June 29, 1931   Monticello                207 Ga.      112   July 24, 1952   Louisville                132Hawaii   100   April 27,1931   Pahala                    850Idaho    118   July 28, 1934   Orofino                   1,027Ill.     117   July 14, 1954   E. St Louis               410 Ind.     116   July 14, 1936   Collegeville              672Iowa     118   July 20, 1934   Keokuk                    614 Kansas   121   July 24, 1936   Alton                     1,651Ky.      114   July 28, 1930   Greensburg                581 La.      114   Aug. 10, 1936   Plain Dealing             268Maine    105   July 10, 1911   N. Bridgton               450Md.      109   July 10, 1936   Cumberland and Frederick  623, 325 Mass.    107   Aug.  2, 1975   New Bedford and Chester   120, 640Mich.    112   July 13, 1936   Mio                       963Minn.    114   July  6, 1936   Moorhead                  904Miss.    115   July 29, 1930   Holly Springs             600Mo       118   July 14, 1954   Warsaw and Union          705, 560Mont.    117   July  5, 1937   Medicine Lake             1,950Neb.     118   July 24, 1936   Minden                    2,169Nev.     125   June 29, 1994   Laughlin                  605N.H.     106   July  4, 1911   Nashua                    125N.J.     110   July 10, 1936   Runyon                    18N.M.     122   June 27, 1994   Lakewood                  N/AN.Y.     108   July 22, 1926   Troy                      35N.C.     110   Aug. 21, 1983   Fayetteville              213N.D.     121   July  6, 1936   Steele                    1,857Ohio     113   July 21, 1934   Gallipolis                673Okla.    120   June 27, 1994   Tipton                    1,350Ore.     119   Aug. 10, 1898   Pendleton                 1,074 Pa.      111   July 10, 1936   Phoenixville              100 R.I.     104   Aug.  2, 1975   Providence                51S.C.     111   June 28, 1954   Camden                    170S.D.     120   July 15, 2006   Kelly Ranch/Usta          2,339Tenn.    113   Aug.  9, 1930   Perryville                377Texas    120   Aug. 12, 1936   Seymour                   1,291Utah     117   July  5, 1985   Saint George              2,880Vt.      105   July  4, 1911   Vernon                    310Va.      110   July 15, 1954   Balcony Falls             725Wash.    118   Aug.  5, 1961   Ice Harbor Dam  475       475   W. Va.   112   July 10, 1936   Martinsburg               435Wis.     114   July 13, 1936   Wisconsin Dells           900Wyo.     116   Aug.  8, 1983   Basin                     3,500
> *Elevation estimated.
> 
> Source: U.S. National Climatic Data Center (last updated August 2006)





> State by state low temperature records
> State         Temp.       Date            Station        Elevation
> ( F)                                         (feet)
> Alabama        -27    Jan. 30, 1966     New Market           760
> ...



the record highs and lows seem to be spread out pretty thoroughly. the only record for 2011 that I see is for the Oklahoma low. perhaps the newspaper list is not updating from the site properly.


----------



## IanC (Aug 10, 2011)

this wikipedia list seems to have an extra entry from the new millenia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._state_temperature_extremes


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Aug 10, 2011)

"All research is in a lab. Otherwise, it's not science." --Rdean

Even Rdean can tell this isn't science.


----------



## konradv (Aug 10, 2011)

CrusaderFrank said:


> "All research is in a lab. Otherwise, it's not science." --Rdean
> 
> Even Rdean can tell this isn't science.



Well, you could both be wrong.  As a matter of fact, you are.


----------



## Chris (Aug 10, 2011)

Oklahoma's record-breaking heat wave made July the hottest month on record in the state.

According to data from the Oklahoma Mesonet, the average temperature in Oklahoma in July was 89.1 degrees, breaking the previous record of 88.1 degrees set in July 1954, said Gary McManus, associate climatologist at the Oklahoma Climatological Survey in Norman. 

Records have been kept of statewide averages since 1895. 

July was hottest month on record in Oklahoma | NewsOK.com


----------



## Chris (Aug 10, 2011)

IanC said:


> > State high temperature records
> > State    Temp    Date          Station                   Elevation (feet) Ala.     112   Sept. 5, 1925   Centerville               345 Alaska   100   June 27, 1915   Ft. Yukon                 420* Ariz.    128   June 29, 1994   Lake Havasu               505Ark.     120   Aug. 10, 1936   Ozark                     396Calif.   134   July 10, 1913   Death Valley              N/A Colo.    118   July 11, 1888   Bennett                   5,484Conn.    106   July 15, 1995   Danbury                   450Del.     110   July 21, 1930   Millsboro                 20Fla.     109   June 29, 1931   Monticello                207 Ga.      112   July 24, 1952   Louisville                132Hawaii   100   April 27,1931   Pahala                    850Idaho    118   July 28, 1934   Orofino                   1,027Ill.     117   July 14, 1954   E. St Louis               410 Ind.     116   July 14, 1936   Collegeville              672Iowa     118   July 20, 1934   Keokuk                    614 Kansas   121   July 24, 1936   Alton                     1,651Ky.      114   July 28, 1930   Greensburg                581 La.      114   Aug. 10, 1936   Plain Dealing             268Maine    105   July 10, 1911   N. Bridgton               450Md.      109   July 10, 1936   Cumberland and Frederick  623, 325 Mass.    107   Aug.  2, 1975   New Bedford and Chester   120, 640Mich.    112   July 13, 1936   Mio                       963Minn.    114   July  6, 1936   Moorhead                  904Miss.    115   July 29, 1930   Holly Springs             600Mo       118   July 14, 1954   Warsaw and Union          705, 560Mont.    117   July  5, 1937   Medicine Lake             1,950Neb.     118   July 24, 1936   Minden                    2,169Nev.     125   June 29, 1994   Laughlin                  605N.H.     106   July  4, 1911   Nashua                    125N.J.     110   July 10, 1936   Runyon                    18N.M.     122   June 27, 1994   Lakewood                  N/AN.Y.     108   July 22, 1926   Troy                      35N.C.     110   Aug. 21, 1983   Fayetteville              213N.D.     121   July  6, 1936   Steele                    1,857Ohio     113   July 21, 1934   Gallipolis                673Okla.    120   June 27, 1994   Tipton                    1,350Ore.     119   Aug. 10, 1898   Pendleton                 1,074 Pa.      111   July 10, 1936   Phoenixville              100 R.I.     104   Aug.  2, 1975   Providence                51S.C.     111   June 28, 1954   Camden                    170S.D.     120   July 15, 2006   Kelly Ranch/Usta          2,339Tenn.    113   Aug.  9, 1930   Perryville                377Texas    120   Aug. 12, 1936   Seymour                   1,291Utah     117   July  5, 1985   Saint George              2,880Vt.      105   July  4, 1911   Vernon                    310Va.      110   July 15, 1954   Balcony Falls             725Wash.    118   Aug.  5, 1961   Ice Harbor Dam  475       475   W. Va.   112   July 10, 1936   Martinsburg               435Wis.     114   July 13, 1936   Wisconsin Dells           900Wyo.     116   Aug.  8, 1983   Basin                     3,500
> > *Elevation estimated.
> >
> ...



Your quote with no link says "Last updated August 2006"


----------



## Dabs (Aug 10, 2011)

Today it was 98 crappy degrees. Bring on Autumn!!


----------



## ScienceRocks (Aug 11, 2011)

Chris said:


> Oklahoma's record-breaking heat wave made July the hottest month on record in the state.
> 
> According to data from the Oklahoma Mesonet, the average temperature in Oklahoma in July was 89.1 degrees, breaking the previous record of 88.1 degrees set in July 1954, said Gary McManus, associate climatologist at the Oklahoma Climatological Survey in Norman.
> 
> ...



Portland Oregon and the western United states is having one of the coldest summers in recorded history. The last time portland had no 90s up to this date was 1954.


----------



## daveman (Aug 11, 2011)

Matthew said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > Oklahoma's record-breaking heat wave made July the hottest month on record in the state.
> ...



That's just weather, and doesn't count.

Right, Chris?


----------



## IanC (Aug 11, 2011)

Chris said:


> IanC said:
> 
> 
> > > State high temperature records
> ...



yup, I noticed that too. thats why I copied it. the USAToday post seems to link to the actual govt data table though otherwise it wouldnt have a 2011 listing.

my main point is that most of the records werent set recently.


----------



## Big Fitz (Aug 11, 2011)

IanC said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > IanC said:
> ...


Bah!  Nothing's changed in 5 years.


----------



## skookerasbil (Aug 12, 2011)

Hey Chris..........where you at?

Forgot to post up your gay-ass fake temperature data today??!!!!!!!!


----------



## Mr.Nick (Aug 12, 2011)

Chris said:


> Record Events for Mon Mar 14, 2011 through Sun Mar 20, 2011
> 
> High Temperatures: 537
> Low Temperatures: 11
> ...



That is intellectual dishonesty.

What is your measuring stick? a fucking hockey stick?

Do you have any idea how inaccurate weather records are?

It could be 97 and 10 miles away it could be 105 and at the "official" weather station 40 miles away it could be 103.

If the official record is 104 the record was not "officially" broken now was it - despite being 105 30 miles away.

The climate data is a) massively flawed and b) is skewed by asshats with agendas.


----------



## skookerasbil (Aug 13, 2011)

Mr.Nick said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > Record Events for Mon Mar 14, 2011 through Sun Mar 20, 2011
> ...





LOL......and they never have the little footnote that, "Temperature readings taken 2 1/2 feet from mega-air conditioning unit condensor".


----------



## Old Rocks (Aug 14, 2011)

Well, for the flap yaps, here is where you can search for your record cooling last winter;

HAMweather Climate Center - Record Events for The Past Week - Continental US View

Now, while one year is not indictutive of a trend, when that year includes a record La Nina, and a low TSI, yet there are all kinds of record temps being set, not just in the USA, but worldwide, that is indictutive that something has changed. The combination of a record La Nina, and a low TSI should have created a very cold winter, and a cool summer for most of the world. It has not. Even by Dr. Spencer's charts, this was a warm winter.

UAH Global Temperature Update July, 2011: +0.37 deg. C « Roy Spencer, Ph. D.

And the anamoly for July was nearly equal to the high averages for 1998 and 2010. And then there are the freighters that are presently plying the Northeast Passage without icebreakers. That did not happen at all prior to 2000, let alone for a two month period. And within a week, the major route for the Northwest Passage will be open for business. A minor one is already ice free.

Chris is correct, given the factors, this summers record temperatures, here and abroad, are significant.


----------



## Mad Scientist (Aug 14, 2011)

We should give all our money to Algore, that'll stop GW!


----------



## Big Fitz (Aug 14, 2011)

daveman said:


> Remember, folks:
> 
> One month of cold temperatures in the winter does not disprove global warming.
> 
> But one month of hot temperatures in the summer proves it.


He doesn't believe he has enough threads laughing at him.


----------



## Oddball (Aug 14, 2011)

The Infidel said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > Rat in the Hat said:
> ...


----------



## Chris (Aug 14, 2011)

Record Events for Sun Aug 7, 2011 through Sat Aug 13, 2011 
Total Records: 2776 
Rainfall: 550 
High Temperatures: 669 
Low Temperatures: 63 
Lowest Max Temperatures: 85 
Highest Min Temperatures: 1409 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## daveman (Aug 14, 2011)

Big Fitz said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Remember, folks:
> ...



If he enjoys being laughed at, I'll hook a brother up.


----------



## daveman (Aug 14, 2011)

1936 North American heat wave - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

July was the peak month, in which temperatures reached all-time record levelsmany of which still stand as of 2010. In Steele, North Dakota, temperatures reached 121 °F (49 °C), which remains North Dakota's record. In Ohio, temperatures reached 110 °F (43 °C), which nearly tied the previous record set in 1934. The states of Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, Arkansas, Minnesota, Michigan, North Dakota, South Dakota, Pennsylvania, Louisiana, Nebraska, Wisconsin, West Virginia, and New Jersey also experienced record highs temperatures. The provinces of Ontario and Manitoba set still-standing record highs above 110 °F (43 °C). Chicago Midway airport recorded 100 °F (38 °C) or higher temperatures on 12 consecutive days from July 617, 1936. Later that summer in downstate Illinois, at Mount Vernon the temperature surpassed 100 °F (38 °C) for 18 days running from August 1229, 1936.[1]
Some stations in the American Midwest reported minimum temperatures at or above 90 °F (32 °C) such as 91 °F (33 °C) at Lincoln, Nebraska on 25 July 1936; the next and most recent time this is known to have happened is a handful of 90 °F (32 °C) maxima during a similar heat wave in late June 1988 but far less intense than that of 1936.​


----------



## skookerasbil (Aug 14, 2011)




----------



## skookerasbil (Aug 14, 2011)




----------



## Trakar (Aug 14, 2011)

skookerasbil said:


>



Worldwide, Blame for Climate Change Falls on Humans

You seem to be mistaken


----------



## Meister (Aug 14, 2011)

Trakar said:


> skookerasbil said:
> 
> 
> >
> ...



The world would be the benefactors of our money, Trakar.  Go figure. 

PS....Follow the money, always follow the money


----------



## saveliberty (Aug 14, 2011)

One must also be careful how you interpret trends in Antarctic sea ice. Currently this ice is increasing and has been for years but is this the smoking gun against climate change? Not quite. Antarctic sea ice is gaining because of many different reasons but the most accepted recent explanations are listed below:

i) Ozone levels over Antarctica have dropped causing stratospheric cooling and increasing winds which lead to more areas of open water that can be frozen (Gillet 2003, Thompson 2002, Turner 2009). 

and 

ii) The Southern Ocean is freshening because of increased rain, glacial run-off and snowfall. This changes the composition of the different layers in the ocean there causing less mixing between warm and cold layers and thus less melted sea ice (Zhang 2007).

All the sea ice talk aside, it is quite clear that really when it comes to Antarctic ice, sea ice is not the most important thing to measure. In Antarctica, the most important ice mass is the land ice sitting on the West Antarctic Ice Sheet and the East Antarctic Ice Sheet.

Is Antarctica losing or gaining ice?

I notice we are getting a lot more rain these days.  If it continues, a shift in ice generation should occur according to this model.  Reduced ozone whould increase winds and ice growth as well.  Oh, oh, the Earth is making adjustments.


----------



## Trakar (Aug 14, 2011)

Meister said:


> Trakar said:
> 
> 
> > skookerasbil said:
> ...



It is cheaper to address climate change issues before the impacts fully manifest than it is to try and ameliorate damages as and after they occur. The delay only enhances short term profits for the few, while costing more in taxes for all to deal with the damages and impacts later on,...indeed, follow the money,...who has record profits to protect, while they are still suckling at the government subsidy teat?


----------



## gslack (Aug 14, 2011)

I smell a clone...


----------



## Trakar (Aug 15, 2011)

gslack said:


> I smell a clone...



Did you check your lederhosen?!


----------



## RollingThunder (Aug 15, 2011)

It is always funny watching reality deniers try to deny what is right there in front of everyone's faces. You poor deluded dupes are a hoot sometimes. Most times though your're just very pathetic.

Here's a further reality check for those with their eyes open.

*All 50 States Have Set High Temperature Records This July*
(excerpt)

*With the East Coast heat wave this weekend, every state in the union has seen record high temperatures this month &#8212; Delaware was the last to fall to the heat. Record highs have outpaced record lows by a ratio of five to one: There have been 2,068 record high daily maximum temperatures in the United States, 1.5 percent of all the measurements. There have been only 380 record low minimum temperatures, 0.3 percent of the readings. More remarkably, and consistent with the expected effect of higher greenhouse gas concentrations, nights have been even warmer &#8212; 4,638 record high daily minimum temperatures were recorded, 3.4 percent of all readings. There have been only 638 record low daily maximum temperatures, 0.5 percent of all readings.
*


***


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Aug 15, 2011)

Rat in the Hat said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > Rat in the Hat said:
> ...



Chris is a very much needed comic relief.


----------



## Spud (Aug 15, 2011)

How do you get _global _warming from one set of data from one country?


----------



## RollingThunder (Aug 15, 2011)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Rat in the Hat said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...



Or perhaps your ignorant comments are un-needed and rather idiotic.

*2010 Produced Record Rainfall, and It Keeps Coming
University of Santa Barbara*
(excerpt)

*When one combines the impact of La Niña with the increase of global ocean temperatures of 0.5°C (0.9°F) over the past 50 years, which has put 4% more water vapor into the atmosphere since 1970, the result is a much increased chance of unprecedented floods. A 4% increase in atmospheric moisture may not sound like much, but it turns out that precipitation will increase by about 8% with that 4% moisture increase. Critically, it is the extreme rainfall events that tend to supply the increased rainfall. For example, (Groisman et al., 2004) found a 20% increase in very heavy (top 1%) precipitation events over the U.S. in the past century, and a 36% rise in cold season (October - April) "extreme" precipitation events (those in the 99.9% percentile--1 in 1000 events. These extreme rainfall events are the ones most likely to cause floods (source).
*


----------



## edthecynic (Aug 15, 2011)

Rat in the Hat said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > Rat in the Hat said:
> ...


But not RECORD cold!!!!!!!!
Snow is a precipitation event.


----------



## RollingThunder (Aug 15, 2011)

Spud said:


> How do you get _global _warming from one set of data from one country?



If you pulled your head out of the denier cult echo chamber and looked around, you would find data for the whole world readily available, but that data is not the topic of this thread. Here's a taste though.

*June 2011 was the 316th consecutive month with a global temperature above the 20th century average. The last month with below-average temperature was February 1985.

The June worldwide average land surface temperature was 0.89°C (1.60°F) above the 20th century average of 13.3°C (55.9°F)&#8212;the fourth warmest on record.

- NOAA*
***





*Central England historical temperatures for April

This year brought the warmest April in at least 350 years in the Central England Temperature record, which averages readings from a set of long-term weather observing sites. (Illustration courtesy tamino.wordpress.org)

source: World Weather Post*
***

*Perth setting new summer temperature records*
Sun 27 Feb 2011
***

*Sydney faces week of record heat*
January 31, 2011


----------



## edthecynic (Aug 15, 2011)

daveman said:


> Rat in the Hat said:
> 
> 
> > You know, I'm having trouble finding any stories from the rest of the world about their having 9,000 record high temperatures.
> ...


Actually, that's what US Messageboard denier Ian has been claiming all along. He says it's because the US has the most temperature stations and therefore is the most accurate measure of global warming. Except, of course, when US temps indicate warming, then the US temps don't count for anything!!!


----------



## Spud (Aug 15, 2011)

RollingThunder said:


> Spud said:
> 
> 
> > How do you get _global _warming from one set of data from one country?
> ...



See, I'm not a GW denier, I just enjoy accuracy, temperature from one country isn't applicable on a global level, and isn't proof of anything except high temperatures in one country. I can't pull rainfall levels from Korea and then try and apply that to Somalia. There's any number of factors affecting this, greenhouse gas is just one.


----------



## edthecynic (Aug 15, 2011)

daveman said:


> Remember, folks:
> 
> One month of cold temperatures in the winter does not disprove global warming.
> 
> But one month of hot temperatures in the summer proves it.


No one claimed that one month of hot temps proves global warming, that is just your Straw Man.

But deniers on this board have been mindlessly parroting on other threads their MessiahRushie's claim that there were NO heat records set in July.

July 25, 2011
RUSH:  Well, how do you dolts feel now when you understand that *there wasn't one record set last week*? ... and *there were no records set last week, pure and simple.*

July 26, 2011
RUSH:  "The government also reserves several hundred million dollars more," above and beyond the five billion, "which it can distribute to states during weather emergencies, such as the heat wave that is currently scorching large swaths of the country."  But again, *no heat records are being broken.*  Contrary to everything you've seen in the news, *heat records are not being broken. *


----------



## gslack (Aug 15, 2011)

Trakar said:


> gslack said:
> 
> 
> > I smell a clone...
> ...



Quiet clone...


----------



## konradv (Aug 15, 2011)

gslack said:


> I smell a clone...



That's your underwear.


----------



## konradv (Aug 15, 2011)

gslack said:


> Trakar said:
> 
> 
> > gslack said:
> ...



I smell a clown.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Aug 15, 2011)

RollingThunder said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Rat in the Hat said:
> ...



Global warming was debunked when they tried to destory their non supported data.. You warmers lost move along and start some other kind of control agenda.


----------



## gslack (Aug 15, 2011)

Kornhole you make another clone?


----------



## gslack (Aug 15, 2011)

I want to know how many temperature threads chris is going to start....


----------



## daveman (Aug 15, 2011)

RollingThunder said:


> It is always funny watching reality deniers try to deny what is right there in front of everyone's faces. You poor deluded dupes are a hoot sometimes. Most times though your're just very pathetic.
> 
> Here's a further reality check for those with their eyes open.
> 
> ...


Gee, you idiots used to say weather couldn't be used to prove a trend until you had 10 years' worth of data.

Now it's 30 days.

This isn't science, Roxy.  It's wishful thinking.


----------



## daveman (Aug 15, 2011)

edthecynic said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Rat in the Hat said:
> ...


I haven't seen him claim that.  Perhaps you're seeing what you want to see.

What am I saying?  Of course you do.  You're an AGW cultist.


----------



## gslack (Aug 15, 2011)

edthecynic said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Remember, folks:
> ...



Hold on eunuch, you and chris have been making the case all along that all this record heat this past july has been due to global warming. Its no strawman shithead its fact you guys do it in every temp thread chris starts and you are doing it now moron....

IF one month of record cold in winter is not evidence that its not warming than one month of record heat in summer is not evidence of global warming either... 

Dam you're dumb as a stumb ed...


----------



## daveman (Aug 15, 2011)

edthecynic said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Remember, folks:
> ...


Horseshit.


edthecynic said:


> But deniers on this board have been mindlessly parroting on other threads their MessiahRushie's claim that there were NO heat records set in July.
> 
> July 25, 2011
> RUSH:  Well, how do you dolts feel now when you understand that *there wasn't one record set last week*? ... and *there were no records set last week, pure and simple.*
> ...



I don't listen to Rush, and I really don't care what he says.  I'm not some hero-worshiping leftist.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Aug 15, 2011)

gslack said:


> I want to know how many temperature threads chris is going to start....



until he get's it right.


----------



## daveman (Aug 15, 2011)

Trakar said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> > Trakar said:
> ...


Currently, the price tag is 14 trillion dollars.  

You know any nation that can afford that?  We can't...especially since the AGW cult hasn't proven their case.

I'm not prepared to support the collapse of all Western economies based on bad science and fear-mongering.  YMMV.


----------



## Meister (Aug 15, 2011)

Trakar said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> > Trakar said:
> ...



Luckily the US isn't falling for all your BS, Trakar.  No dots have been connected, and the redistribution of our wealth isn't going to happen on this.
Keep carrying the water for the extreme left.


----------



## konradv (Aug 15, 2011)

gslack said:


> Kornhole you make another clone?



Here's the deal.  I'll be a clone, if you'll admit you're a clown.


----------



## Trakar (Aug 15, 2011)

Meister said:


> Luckily the US isn't falling for all your BS, Trakar.  No dots have been connected, and the redistribution of our wealth isn't going to happen on this.
> Keep carrying the water for the extreme left.



Wealth is already being redistrbuted in the form of corporate welfare to those already recording record profits. Wealth is increasingly being redistributed in this country from the poorest members of our souciety to the wealthiest members of our society, why should the few be the only ones to extract benefit from the sweat of the brow of the many?
Will the working poor are paying increasingly more in real and virtual taxes, the wealth keeps travelling upward and stagnating at the top, it isn't being invested or "trickling down" on anyone. But these are simple, verifiable facts about filed markets and a broken economic system.

More important than these ideological perspectives, however, are the scientific facts and realities of climate change. Now if you want to discuss externalities and economic realities of climate change, we can certainly go that route, but economics is a science as well, and its going to take compelling reasoned discussion and supporting evidences not the hand-waving sound-byte rhetoric, which thus far, seems to be the extent of your discussion capacity on this topic.


----------



## Trakar (Aug 15, 2011)

daveman said:


> Trakar said:
> 
> 
> > Meister said:
> ...



Cite or reference? 

"...Four global warming impacts alonehurricane damage, real estate losses, energy costs, and water costswill come with a price tag of 1.8 percent of U.S. GDP, or almost $1.9 trillion annually (in todays dollars) by 2100..."
http://www.nrdc.org/globalwarming/cost/cost.pdf


Pay Now, Pay Later: How much is climate change going to cost you? 
Pay Now, Pay Later: How much is climate change going to cost you? - YouTube
Pay Now, Pay Later A state-by-state assessment of the costs of climate change. Click on a state below to find out how much climate change is going to cost you.
Secure American Future - an American Security Project

Assessing the Near-Term Risk of Climate Uncertainty: Interdependencies among the
U.S. States
https://cfwebprod.sandia.gov/cfdocs/CCIM/docs/Climate_Risk_Assessment.pdf


> ...We use results of the climate-model ensemble from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Changes (IPCC) Fourth Assessment Report (AR4) as a proxy for representing climate uncertainty over the next 40 years, map the simulated weather from the climate models hydrologically to the county level to determine the physical consequences on economic activity at the state level, and perform a detailed 70-industry analysis of economic impacts among the interacting lower-48 states. We determine the industry-level contribution to the gross domestic product and employment impacts at the state level, as well as interstate population migration, effects on personal income, and consequences for the U.S. trade balance. We show that the mean or average risk of damage to the U.S. economy from climate change, at the national level, is on the order of $1 trillion over the next 40 years, with losses in employment equivalent to nearly 7 million full-time jobs...






> You know any nation that can afford that?  We can't...especially since the AGW cult hasn't proven their case.
> 
> I'm not prepared to support the collapse of all Western economies based on bad science and fear-mongering.  YMMV.



I don't think tax payers should be subsidizing the clean-up of the pollution and its impacts by companies with record making profits who are already receiving government subsidies to cover their research and development costs,...do you? Reducing or preventing climate change increases the strength of current and future economies, continuing the current trends only weakens and damages current and future economies.


----------



## Meister (Aug 15, 2011)

Trakar said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> > Luckily the US isn't falling for all your BS, Trakar.  No dots have been connected, and the redistribution of our wealth isn't going to happen on this.
> ...



Yeah, whatever 
The evidence that you provide are from a funded studies...  follow the money back from that point, Trakar.  Several of the studies providing "evidence" of AGW are tainted. I could fund a study that would end up with my desired results...imagine that.
Your discussion capacity is your socialist views...I think a better fit for you would be the UK.
You can babble on you want, but in the end, your not going to change too many minds...just sayin'


----------



## RollingThunder (Aug 15, 2011)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> RollingThunder said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...


No data was destroyed. That is just another one of your denier cult delusions. Anthropogenic global warming is very real and is evident all over the planet. You are just a brainwashed denier cult retard with your head jammed so far up your ass you can't see the evidence all around you.


----------



## ScienceRocks (Aug 15, 2011)

La nina is coming back -.5c as of now within 3.4. Look at the models...Forecasting anywhere from -1.2-2.4 for late Fall. Moderate to stronger nina then 2008, late 2010-early 2011 nina. Lets see how the global temperatures turn out now. If we still beat 2008 with this then wow.


----------



## daveman (Aug 15, 2011)

Trakar said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Trakar said:
> ...


Ooops, sorry, I made a mistake.

The UN says it's 76 trillion dollars.

You can send them a check.  But keep your damn hands out of my wallet.


----------



## ScienceRocks (Aug 15, 2011)

I will go as far as to say that this year shouldn't be within the top 20 if a strong nina develops before the years out. Going to be a very cold year.


----------



## Trakar (Aug 15, 2011)

Matthew said:


> I will go as far as to say that this year shouldn't be within the top 20 if a strong nina develops before the years out. Going to be a very cold year.



Seriously? The facts seem to indicate otherwise:

January 2011 Temperature anomaly  
(temp above 1971 - 2000 baseline average)
The combined global land and ocean average surface temperature for January 2011 was 0.38°C (0.68°F) above the 20th century average of 12.0°C (53.6°F). This is the 17th warmest January on record. 
State of the Climate | Global Analysis | January 2011

February 2011 Temperature anomaly
The combined global land and ocean average surface temperature for February 2011 was 0.40°C (0.72°F) above the 20th century average of 12.1°C (53.9°F). This ties for the 17th warmest such value on record.
State of the Climate | Global Analysis | February 2011

March 2011 Temperature anomaly
The combined global land and ocean average surface temperature for March 2011 was the 13th warmest on record at 13.19°C (55.78°F), which is 0.49°C (0.88°F) above the 20th century average of 12.7°C (54.9°F). This was also the 35th consecutive March with global land and ocean temperatures above the 20th century average. 
State of the Climate | Global Analysis | March 2011

April 2011 Temperature anomaly
The combined global land and ocean average surface temperature for April 2011 was the seventh warmest April on record at 14.29°C (57.76°F), which is 0.59°C (1.06°F) above the 20th century average of 13.7°C (56.7°F). This was also the 35th consecutive April with global land and ocean temperatures above the 20th century average. 
State of the Climate | Global Analysis | April 2011

May 2011 Temperature anomaly
The combined global land and ocean average surface temperature for May 2011 was 0.50°C (0.90°F) above the 20th century average of 14.8°C (58.6°F). This is the 10th warmest such value since records began in 1880. For MarchMay 2011, the combined global land and ocean surface temperature was 0.53°C (0.95°F) above averagealso the 10th warmest MarchMay on record. The combined global land and ocean average surface temperature for JanuaryMay 2011 was the 12th warmest on record. The year-to-date period was 0.48°C (0.86°F) warmer than the 20th century average. 
State of the Climate | Global Analysis | May 2011

June 2011 Temperature anomaly
The combined global land and ocean average surface temperature for June 2011 was the seventh warmest on record at 16.08°C (60.94°F), which is 0.58°C (1.04°F) above the 20th century average of 15.5°C (59.9°F). June 2011 was the 316th consecutive month with a global temperature above the 20th century average. The last month with below-average temperature was February 1985. The June worldwide average land surface temperature was 0.89°C (1.60°F) above the 20th century average of 13.3°C (55.9°F)the fourth warmest on record. The global average ocean surface temperature was the 10th warmest June on record, at 0.47°C (0.85°F) above average. Neither El Niño nor La Niña conditions were present during June 2011. According to NOAA's Climate Prediction Center, these ENSO-neutral conditions are expected to continue into the Northern Hemisphere fall 2011. The first half of 2011 (JanuaryJune) was the 11th warmest on record for the combined global land and ocean surface temperature. Separately, the worldwide average ocean temperature was also the 11th warmest JanuaryJune and the worldwide average land temperature was the 12th warmest such period. 
State of the Climate | Global Analysis | June 2011

July 2011 Temperature anomaly
The combined global land and ocean average surface temperature for July 2011 was the seventh warmest on record, at 16.37°C (61.43°F), which is 0.57°C (1.03°F) above the 20th century average of 15.8°C (60.4°F). The July worldwide land surface temperature was 0.84°C (1.51°F) above the 20th century average of 14.3°C (57.8°F)the fifth warmest July on record. The worldwide ocean surface temperature was 0.47°C (0.85°F) above the 20th century average of 16.4°C (61.5°F)the 11th warmest July on record. Neither El Niño nor La Niña conditions were present during July 2011. According to NOAA's Climate Prediction Center, ENSO-neutral conditions are expected to continue into the Northern Hemisphere fall 2011. For the year-to-date, the global combined land and ocean surface temperature of 14.31°C (57.82°F) was the 11th warmest JanuaryJuly period on record. This value is 0.51°C (0.92°F) above the 20th century average.
State of the Climate | Global Analysis | July 2011

That looks like 17th, 17th, 13th, 7th, 10th, 7th, and 7th, with a combined average already equalling the 11th warmest year on record with a combined anomaly of 0.51°C (0.92°F) above the 20th century average, and you are predicting this year won't make the top 20?
How strong are your convictions, what kind of odds are you offering?


----------



## Trakar (Aug 15, 2011)

daveman said:


> You can send them a check.  But keep your damn hands out of my wallet.



 You may want to give your tax money to the people already earning record profits, and then pay more taxes to clean up their mess, personally, I rather spend my money as I see fit, rather than making it rain on crony capitalists with no interest in this nation or any its citizens.


----------



## ScienceRocks (Aug 15, 2011)

Trakar said:


> Matthew said:
> 
> 
> > I will go as far as to say that this year shouldn't be within the top 20 if a strong nina develops before the years out. Going to be a very cold year.
> ...



If this year had a global avg means of 2008 it should be 20th or below if a strong nina develops. No way in hell will it be within the top 10 if it didn't warm since.


----------



## Meister (Aug 15, 2011)

Trakar said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > You can send them a check.  But keep your damn hands out of my wallet.
> ...



The rich people, huh?  I see there is class envy going on with some.


----------



## Trakar (Aug 15, 2011)

Matthew said:


> Trakar said:
> 
> 
> > Matthew said:
> ...



From "shouldn't be within the top 20" to "No way in hell will it be within the top 10" is a heck of a back-peddle in the span of a couple of posts,...I guess your convictions aren't as strong as your rhetoric.


----------



## ScienceRocks (Aug 15, 2011)

No, what I mean is if it hadn't warmed since 2008 there is no way this year should be within the top 20. 2008 started out with a strong nina, but went neutral, but this year is already going back to nina.


----------



## Trakar (Aug 15, 2011)

Matthew said:


> No, what I mean is if it hadn't warmed since 2008 there is no way this year should be within the top 20. 2008 started out with a strong nina, but went neutral, but this year is already going back to nina.



Supporting evidence for this assertion? The already cited NOAA references indicate that this year is in a neutral phase with regards to the pacific basin southern oscillation pattern, and seem to believe that it will remain so throughout most of the Fall, at the least.



> ...According to NOAA's Climate Prediction Center, these ENSO-neutral conditions are expected to continue into the Northern Hemisphere fall 2011. The first half of 2011 (JanuaryJune) was the 11th warmest on record for the combined global land and ocean surface temperature...
> ...Neither El Niño nor La Niña conditions were present during July 2011. According to NOAA's Climate Prediction Center, ENSO-neutral conditions are expected to continue into the Northern Hemisphere fall 2011. For the year-to-date, the global combined land and ocean surface temperature of 14.31°C (57.82°F) was the 11th warmest JanuaryJuly period on record...



Of course its possible that we might slip back into la nina, or we could transition to the coming el nino, looking closely at the trends, however, it most closely resembles 2008 where we slipped into a neutral phase about mid-year and remained that way through the winter until the spring of 2009 when we transitioned fully into an el nino condition. Current three month projections call for slightly cooler than normal along the SW coast, much higher than normal through the deep south, southwest and up into the heartland, about average everywhere else.


----------



## ScienceRocks (Aug 16, 2011)

Trakar said:


> Matthew said:
> 
> 
> > No, what I mean is if it hadn't warmed since 2008 there is no way this year should be within the top 20. 2008 started out with a strong nina, but went neutral, but this year is already going back to nina.
> ...









cpc forecasts a strong nina by fall. Meaning that this year will very likely turn out a lot cooler within the tropics then 2008. Believe me I know a thing or to about meteorology as I've spent my life watching it closely. Weather nut supreme here.  

Within the past 2 months we've went from 0c within 3.4 to -.5c, which is borderline Nina. We only need 3 months of such to get a upgrade to nina at the current 3.4 temps. So Unofficially la nina is already here. 

That is just the point, 2008 slipped into a neutral phase about May-June frame throughout the rest of the year, but if the above proves true then this year will be a lot cooler within the tropics. That is all I was saying....You can argue why it has warmed all you went, but it has if this year gets within the top 10 with a strong nina the last 3 months of this year if the noaa is right. The means of the models are near -1.6 to -1.8c, which would put us near 2008, 2010-2011 nina events. Theses are some of the strongest nina events since the 70's. 

Pretty much what I said is if this occurs and we manage to stay within the top 20 with noaa ranking for 2008  was like 16 then the earth has WARMED SINCE 2008. We have had global warming. That would be data supporting global warming since then.


----------



## RollingThunder (Aug 16, 2011)

Matthew said:


> Pretty much what I said is if this occurs and we manage to stay within the top 20 with noaa ranking for 2008  was like 16 then the earth has WARMED SINCE 2008. We have had global warming. That would be data supporting global warming since then.



A small correction, please. 

2010 tied with 2005 as the warmest year, so now 2008 is currently ranked as the 11th warmest year on record. Every year out the last 13 years, except one, is on the list of the top 13 warmest years on record. Every single year of the last decade is among the top ten warmest years on record. The last three decades have each, in turn, been the warmest decade on record and they are now ranked 1st, 2nd and 3rd on the list of the warmest decades since the late 1800's. It is so f**king hilarious when the denier cultists ask: "_Where's the warming trend?_" Reminds me of an old proverb - &#8220;*There are none so blind as those that will not see*&#8221;

*Warmest Years*

BTW, I think you're going to be proved wrong about the ranking of 2011 but let's wait a few months and see what happens. I still think this year will wind up being among the top few warmest years, if it doesn't manage to set a new record even in spite of the ENSO neutral or possible El Nino conditions later in the year. Time will tell but so far 2011 has been setting a lot of records. Of course the overall trend is more important than the individual rankings of the years since those do vary a bit due to all  of the other climate factors, like the La Nina/El Nino oscillation in the Pacific, etc.. The planetary temperature trend is unmistakably upward though and it is a sure bet that we will see even hotter years setting new records in this next decade and probably fairly soon. The consequences will probably be somewhat catastrophic for many people around the world in many different ways but unfortunately, that will be only the beginning.


***


----------



## skookerasbil (Aug 16, 2011)

RollingThunder said:


> Matthew said:
> 
> 
> > Pretty much what I said is if this occurs and we manage to stay within the top 20 with noaa ranking for 2008  was like 16 then the earth has WARMED SINCE 2008. We have had global warming. That would be data supporting global warming since then.
> ...




So..........ummmm............whats the point s0n? Pissing contests are gay.

Whats the attitude of the public in 2011 with the alarmist bomb throwers?

MEH


----------



## daveman (Aug 16, 2011)

Trakar said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > You can send them a check.  But keep your damn hands out of my wallet.
> ...


It's no coincidence that every "solution" to global warming is political...because it's not about the environment, it's about political power.

I repeat:  Keep your damn hands out of my wallet.  You're not getting my money to fund your fantasy.


----------



## Chris (Aug 17, 2011)

Record Events for Wed Aug 10, 2011 through Tue Aug 16, 2011 
Total Records: 1716 
Rainfall: 579 
High Temperatures: 337 
Low Temperatures: 56 
Lowest Max Temperatures: 82 
Highest Min Temperatures: 662 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## westwall (Aug 17, 2011)

Meister said:


> Trakar said:
> 
> 
> > daveman said:
> ...








Well, ultimately the GW fraud is about taking money from the First World population and giving it to Third World dictators, but of course they are incompetent so their money will have to be "managed" for them by the elite who know what's best for us........right?  Riiiiiiiiight.


----------



## Trakar (Aug 17, 2011)

daveman said:


> Trakar said:
> 
> 
> > daveman said:
> ...



The only way the idea of not burning fossil fuels in open-cycle combustion systems is poolitical, is because the companies making a profit off of this process are spending a lot of money in an attempt to keep making those profits into the future. I don't want to spend more money than I have to in taxes to clean up the mess of companies that were already sucking my tax dollars in political incentives while earning historic profits. So make these companies pay their way and pay to clean up the messes that result from their profit making ventures,...keep your damn hands out of my wallet, your not getting my money to fund your greed.


----------



## Trakar (Aug 17, 2011)

Meister said:


> Trakar said:
> 
> 
> > daveman said:
> ...



Many here prove that you don't have to be "rich" to be stupid or greedy, and I don't envy the stupid or greedy.


----------



## Meister (Aug 17, 2011)

Trakar said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> > Trakar said:
> ...



uh-huh


----------



## RollingThunder (Aug 17, 2011)

And around the world....


----------



## skookerasbil (Aug 17, 2011)

Chris said:


> Record Events for Wed Aug 10, 2011 through Tue Aug 16, 2011
> Total Records: 1716
> Rainfall: 579
> High Temperatures: 337
> ...


----------



## daveman (Aug 17, 2011)

Trakar said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Trakar said:
> ...


Hey, dumbass:  HALF the electricity in America comes from burning coal.  All your leftist wet dream fantasies about alternative sources are just that:  Fantasies.  You have NOTHING that is practical, economical, and scalable.  NOTHING.

Your unicorns farting rainbows making this a perfect coal-free world just isn't ever going to happen.  

Welcome to reality.  I know you don't recognize it.


----------



## Trakar (Aug 19, 2011)

daveman said:


> Hey, dumbass:  HALF the electricity in America comes from burning coal.  All your leftist wet dream fantasies about alternative sources are just that:  Fantasies.  You have NOTHING that is practical, economical, and scalable.  NOTHING.
> 
> Your unicorns farting rainbows making this a perfect coal-free world just isn't ever going to happen.
> 
> Welcome to reality.  I know you don't recognize it.



Take away all the tax money we are spending to subsidize coal and make those who use it pay the cost of cleaning up the mess created burning their product, and suddenly nearly every alternative energy source is more than competitive. The only way coal and oil can compete in the market is where the market has failed to include true and actual costs of use and production and depends upon tax payer money to generate private sales and profits. Are you a free-market capitalist or aren't you?


----------



## Meister (Aug 19, 2011)

Trakar said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Hey, dumbass:  HALF the electricity in America comes from burning coal.  All your leftist wet dream fantasies about alternative sources are just that:  Fantasies.  You have NOTHING that is practical, economical, and scalable.  NOTHING.
> ...



You aren't naive enough to believe that when the the money loopholes are taken away that they won't just raise the price to consumers are you?  Come on, Trakar, get with the real world and not your utopia that you dream about.


----------



## Big Fitz (Aug 19, 2011)

Meister said:


> Trakar said:
> 
> 
> > daveman said:
> ...


These idiots seem to think that if they ask "Why not?" enough times, reality will change for them.

I wish they'd try it with gravity.


----------



## gslack (Aug 19, 2011)

Trakar said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Hey, dumbass:  HALF the electricity in America comes from burning coal.  All your leftist wet dream fantasies about alternative sources are just that:  Fantasies.  You have NOTHING that is practical, economical, and scalable.  NOTHING.
> ...



ANY MONEY used to subsidize coal is done so due to environmental pressures from environmentalist groups and political nonsense.

Whats more coal subsidies would have to be pretty few and far between given that coal fired electricity is still the predominate way we get electricity. LOL, coal subsidies? Where? In Africa where the UN has them over a barrel and forces them to not use their coal?

You freaking eco-morons crack me up. You have half the information given to you from only the sources you are told to trust and then go off rambling about science and now coal subsidies...


----------



## Trakar (Aug 19, 2011)

gslack said:


> Trakar said:
> 
> 
> > daveman said:
> ...



Can you provide compelling evidence in support of these assertions?



> Whats more coal subsidies would have to be pretty few and far between given that coal fired electricity is still the predominate way we get electricity.



Full cost accounting for the life cycle of coal
http://solar.gwu.edu/index_files/Resources_files/epstein_full cost of coal.pdf

Federal coal subsidies - SourceWatch

"Estimating U.S. Government Subsidies to Energy Sources: 2002-2008" http://www.elistore.org/Data/products/d19_07.pdf

Taxing Energy in the United States: Which Fuels Does the Tax Code Favor?
http://www.policyarchive.org/handle/10207/bitstreams/14601.pdf

National Academy of Sciences (NAS). 2009. "Hidden Costs of Energy: Unpriced Consequences of Energy Production and Use," - https://download.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=12794#toc [link to full document online simple go to bottom of page and read)


----------



## ScienceRocks (Aug 19, 2011)

I agree---I don't trust the global temperature data very much outside of the USA and Europe. I find it hard to believe how much weight we put into it all the way back into the 19th century. I mean seriously---how can any sane person do so.

The error must be huge!


----------



## FactFinder (Aug 19, 2011)

More record temps?   Where in Texas? Is that the only place that counts?


----------



## edthecynic (Aug 19, 2011)

Matthew said:


> I agree---I don't trust the global temperature data very much outside of the USA and Europe. I find it hard to believe how much weight we put into it all the way back into the 19th century. I mean seriously---how can any sane person do so.
> 
> The error must be huge!


They use satellites today for global temps and the satellites show warming every decade. And if you've ever seen a chart of global temps that go back to the 19th century, you would see that the margin of error is greater the farther back you go.


----------



## gslack (Aug 19, 2011)

Trakar said:


> gslack said:
> 
> 
> > Trakar said:
> ...



Boy oh boy did you put your foot in your mouth... I thought I smelled a clone, and here you go and pull a classic edthecynic...

Your question regarding any evidence I have of my assertions? Really? You want proof that environmentalists groups pressure the coal industry and do so through their government representation? Why Greenpeace and many others make it a selling point that they pressure energy companies and governments for alternative energy sources especially coal.

WOW... LOL

Next part... Exactly where in those links does it reliably show I was wrong in my contention? See your first mistake was citing sourcewatch. They have been caught lying on more than one occasion and I myself have nailed them lying in their articles in this very forum twice..

If you read it carefully you see they used misleading numbers and descriptions to convey a false assumption. And it is an assumption... They said...

_"A 2010 report by Synapse Energy Economics, "Phasing Out Federal Subsidies for Coal" found the U.S. federal government provides billions of dollars in subsidies for the coal industry. The report was written by Lucy Johnston (Synapse Energy Economics), Lisa Hamilton (Rockefeller Family Fund), Mark Kresowik (Sierra Club), Tom Sanzillo (TR Rose Associates), and David Schlissel (Schlissel Technical Consulting) and was released on April 13, 2010.
The report identifies four major areas where taxpayer money continues to fund the construction, expansion, and life extension of coal-fired power plants, thus acting as federal coal subsidies:
Financial support for the World Bank and other international financial institutions that finance fossil fuel use and extraction;
U.S. Treasury Departments backing of tax exempt bonds and Build America Bonds for use in the electric sector;
U.S. Department of Agricultures Rural Utilities Service provision of loans, loan guarantees and lien accommodations to power companies that are investing in new or existing coal plants;
Tax credits, loans and loan guarantees through the U.S. Department of Energy.
The World Bank and other International Finance Institutions
The United States is the largest contributor to the World Bank and a major supporter of other international financial institutions such as the Inter-American Development Bank and the African Development Bank. The United States also provides subsidized financing internationally through the Overseas Private Investment Corporation and the U.S. Export Import Bank. International financial institutions have helped finance 88 new and expanded coal plants since the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) came into effect in 1994, providing more than $137 billion in direct and indirect financial support for new coal-fired power plants.
Examples of World Bank Funding
Two recent examples of World Bank support for new coal plants include:
The 4,000 MW Tata Ultra Mega Power Project in India, with construction funded by the World Bank and the Asian Development Bank. It is scheduled to be completed by 2012.
South African power company Eskoms proposed 4,800 MW Medupi Power Station, one of the largest in the world. The World Bank has approved more than $3 billion and the African Development Bank also provided more than $500 million in financial support for the project."_

Why notice right away they start saying "coal" and then say "energy".. Yeah like the way they give tax breaks for solar power and wind?.. LOL nice bit of bullshit there.. Really..

Notice they blame the WORLD BANK? Yeah the UN's own bank there... And notice one of the names they got the data from was the Sierra CLub? Yeah one of them conspiracy theories huh....
Your nest link was to a PDF that tells us basically how expensive coal is to use.. Really? since we aren't privy to the context of this brief nor its source what can we make of it?

The funny thing about that paper is this line...
_" Begin phasing out coal and phasing in cleanly
powered smart grids, using place-appropriate
alternative energy sources"_

Do basically the entire paper told us coal is cost prohibitive to use as a fuel source, but they don't have any viable alternatives yet so they recommend we begin phasing out coal in favor for an alternative to be named later?

LOL PURE BULLSHIT FROM START TO FINISH!

Dude your third link was to the national academy of sciences download page and I do not care to spank your BS anymore..

You are an ed the eunuch clone. A lot of links to BS that talks in circles and says nothing of value, that have "science" written on it literally none in it. You cite sourcewatch and national academy of sciences... Could their two of you?


----------



## gslack (Aug 19, 2011)

Coal mining is big business employing many many of the worlds population. Right now it is the most accessible, cost effective, and creates other jobs through its processing and mining. 

Subsidies to coal are a direct result of environmental concerns and pressures from the UN, environmental groups and political nonsense. Africa is kept from mining its coal effectively due to these exact pressures from the UN.

Freaking eco-morons post nonsensical crap that tells them the UN's World Bank subsidizes coal and they say "see coal is expensive".. UNfreakingbeleivable.. THe UN subsidizes countries coal industries to minimize coal use just like the eco-morons want and then they try and use that against them to say coal is expensive.... WOW!


----------



## daveman (Aug 20, 2011)

Trakar said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Hey, dumbass:  HALF the electricity in America comes from burning coal.  All your leftist wet dream fantasies about alternative sources are just that:  Fantasies.  You have NOTHING that is practical, economical, and scalable.  NOTHING.
> ...


Your alternative sources are heavily subsidized.  Yet you don't oppose that.

Did you have a point?


----------



## Trakar (Aug 20, 2011)

daveman said:


> Trakar said:
> 
> 
> > Take away all the tax money we are spending to subsidize coal and make those who use it pay the cost of cleaning up the mess created burning their product, and suddenly nearly every alternative energy source is more than competitive. The only way coal and oil can compete in the market is where the market has failed to include true and actual costs of use and production and depends upon tax payer money to generate private sales and profits. Are you a free-market capitalist or aren't you?
> ...



Actually, I do oppose the government subsidization of any private profit-making venture; that practice undermines the basic economic principles of a free-market system, and is a corporate welfare system designed to create and sustain market failures. I consider short-term start-up assistance to be a bit more palatable but only barely so, and would prefer that ventures do their own financing rather than progressing to the point of having their record breaking profits being underwritten by the dole of taxpayer monies.


----------



## Trakar (Aug 20, 2011)

gslack said:


> Boy oh boy did you put your foot in your mouth... I thought I smelled a clone, and here you go and pull a classic edthecynic...
> 
> 
> Your question regarding any evidence I have of my assertions? Really? You want proof that environmentalists groups pressure the coal industry and do so through their government representation? Why Greenpeace and many others make it a selling point that they pressure energy companies and governments for alternative energy sources especially coal.
> ...



Your exact statement was "ANY MONEY used to subsidize coal is done so due to environmental pressures from environmentalist groups and political nonsense." I asked you to provide compelling supportive evidence of this assertion,...making additional unsupported assertions does not amount to "supportive evidence" much less compelling supportive evidence.



> Next part... Exactly where in those links does it reliably show I was wrong in my contention? See your first mistake was citing sourcewatch. They have been caught lying on more than one occasion and I myself have nailed them lying in their articles in this very forum twice..



My references were not about disproofing assertions you have yet to support (much less proof) they were simply references to research and data which indicates that coal subsidies are neither rare nor inconsiderable, despite another unsupported assertion you made that seems to either misunderstand or seriously misstate the issues at hand with regard to coal and government subsidies.



> ...Dude your third link was to the national academy of sciences download page and I do not care to spank your BS anymore...



If you had bothered to scroll down the page just a bit you would have seen that it was actually a link to the online hypertext version of the book in question. Most of the National Academy of Sciences publications are available freely online,

If this post is any indication of your reading and science skills it is probably best that you quit embarassing yourself and spend your computer time a little more productively, all the one handed typing and self-spanking are obviously already taking their toll.


----------



## Chris (Aug 20, 2011)

Record Events for Sat Aug 13, 2011 through Fri Aug 19, 2011 
Total Records: 1714 
Rainfall: 595 
High Temperatures: 423 
Low Temperatures: 90 
Lowest Max Temperatures: 70 
Highest Min Temperatures: 536 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## Wicked Jester (Aug 21, 2011)

Chris said:


> Record Events for Sat Aug 13, 2011 through Fri Aug 19, 2011
> Total Records: 1714
> Rainfall: 595
> High Temperatures: 423
> ...


New NASA Data Blow Gaping Hole In Global Warming Alarmism - Yahoo! News


----------



## gslack (Aug 21, 2011)

Trakar said:


> gslack said:
> 
> 
> > Boy oh boy did you put your foot in your mouth... I thought I smelled a clone, and here you go and pull a classic edthecynic...
> ...





> Your exact statement was "ANY MONEY used to subsidize coal is done so due to environmental pressures from environmentalist groups and political nonsense." I asked you to provide compelling supportive evidence of this assertion,...making additional unsupported assertions does not amount to "supportive evidence" much less compelling supportive evidence.



LOL, you are really going the semantics route now? Seriously? LOL, dude I thought you were so smart and educated on this.. Wouldn't think you would have to resort to pathetic semantics excuses like this... Remember the point genius... You asked me to prove my assertions, I did so and YOU provided the links.... I suppose I should thank you.

BTW, you forgot my point about subsidies being few and far between given the fact it is the number one energy source for electricity we use. And as your own links confirmed most of those subsidies come from the world bank aka the UN.. Africa ring any bells? Yeah said as much didn't I...



> My references were not about disproofing assertions you have yet to support (much less proof) they were simply references to research and data which indicates that coal subsidies are neither rare nor inconsiderable, despite another unsupported assertion you made that seems to either misunderstand or seriously misstate the issues at hand with regard to coal and government subsidies.



BULLSHIT! Why post them if they were not in rebuttal to my assertions? Yeah stop lying dude you stuck your foot in your mouth and pulled an edthecynic.. You posted them from sourcewatch to try and disprove my claims you made an appeal to authority again and this time it was BAD AUTHORITY and ya got stuck with it. And their rarity is based on what you call a subsidy and what you don't call a subsidy. Sourcewatch calls everything a subsidy and they tell you that if you had actually read it. A loan to a governments infrastructure to build or improve a failing or weak energy system, thats a subsidy for coal according to sourcewatch. Doesn't matter that it covers energy as a whole and not just coal to them cause they got an agenda to push and moonbats to fire up... READ THE PAGE YOU CITED!



> If you had bothered to scroll down the page just a bit you would have seen that it was actually a link to the online hypertext version of the book in question. Most of the National Academy of Sciences publications are available freely online,
> 
> If this post is any indication of your reading and science skills it is probably best that you quit embarassing yourself and spend your computer time a little more productively, all the one handed typing and self-spanking are obviously already taking their toll.



AWWW, you going to cry now?

I didn't read the page after I saw it was to a download page. Simple as that, you want me to read something don't make me jump through hoops. I find your posturing and pretense of knowledge tiresome and pointless. If you had something meaningful that you understood well enough to articulate you would have done so by now.

Another fake scientist with a degree in googology.. You have any idea how many of this exact same alter ego people have tried to use here to try and weasel some unearned respect? Too many to count.. Your persona is not new, nor is it good. Its old, tired and done over and again by people who can do a better acting job than you... Try again.. Maybe next time you can come back as a prepubescent recluse with a thesaurus and a "Bullshit For complete Idiots" book?


----------



## Wicked Jester (Aug 21, 2011)

Trakar said:


> gslack said:
> 
> 
> > Boy oh boy did you put your foot in your mouth... I thought I smelled a clone, and here you go and pull a classic edthecynic...
> ...


Dude, they are spelled D-I-S-P-R-O-V-I-N-G........AND........P-R-O-V-E........Not, disproof and proof.

Christ, if the junk scientists you people adore spell as bad as you, no wonder their BS is being debunked by REAL scientists, who are not paid lackeys for Algore.


----------



## Trakar (Aug 21, 2011)

Wicked Jester said:


> Dude, they are spelled D-I-S-P-R-O-V-I-N-G........AND........P-R-O-V-E........Not, disproof and proof...



I'm sure that is how you spell those words; I used exactly the terms I intended to. Thank you, however, for your consideration.


----------



## Big Black Dog (Aug 21, 2011)

I wonder, if way back when they first started recording temperatures they thought the guy who decided it was a good idea to keep a record of the daily temperature was off his rocker?


----------



## Old Rocks (Aug 21, 2011)

Just Put the Model Down, Roy « Anti-Climate Change Extremism in Utah

The Challenge

I could go on with more nitpicks, but I&#8217;m going to stop here, because it should be clear that, once again, Spencer has made a big deal out of something that doesn&#8217;t have any evidentiary value.  So if, as Spencer claims, &#8220;[t]he evidence for anthropogenic global warming being a false alarm does not get much more convincing than this,&#8221; then can we please move on?  Can Roy PLEASE put his toy model down?

I doubt he will, but maybe he will accept this challenge.  Instead of complaining about how biased and awful the peer review system has gotten, he should (at the very least) get a statistician to work with him and do the modeling right, and then submit it for publication in a reputable journal.  Personally, I don&#8217;t think the work can be saved, even then.  However, I think the exercise of working with someone who knows how to properly make statistical inferences would be enlightening for Roy Spencer.


----------



## Old Rocks (Aug 21, 2011)

Meister said:


> Trakar said:
> 
> 
> > daveman said:
> ...



LOL.   And they are not presently raising the cost of energy every year? Or do you live in some alternative reality?


----------



## daveman (Aug 21, 2011)

Trakar said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Trakar said:
> ...


Then you acknowledge that your alternative sources aren't economically feasible without being propped up by the government.

And you want to do away with coal in favor of these?


----------



## gslack (Aug 21, 2011)

Trakar said:


> Wicked Jester said:
> 
> 
> > Dude, they are spelled D-I-S-P-R-O-V-I-N-G........AND........P-R-O-V-E........Not, disproof and proof...
> ...



Yeah we know you did moron, but the fact remains you were wrong in that. You said....

"*My references were not about disproofing assertions you have yet to support* (*much less proof*) they were simply references to research and data which indicates that coal subsidies are neither rare nor inconsiderable, despite another unsupported assertion you made that seems to either misunderstand or seriously misstate the issues at hand with regard to coal and government subsidies."


Proof = I want proof of that.

Prove = Can you prove that.

Proving = They are proving that.

Now the opposite would be...

Disproof = The burden of disproof lies with you.

Disprove = Can you disprove that?

Disproving = I am disproving that.

Proof is the evidence itself. Prove is what you do or do with that proof.

Get it yet?

Proof is a noun in its natural form. "I want proof of that."

Prove is a verb in its natural form. Or more precisely a transitive verb. Hence prove, proving, proven...

Get it genius? Verb action or state there of, and Noun a person place or thing..

 So if you did say what you meant which I personally think you did, it shows how utterly fake your pretense on here has been. WHich is exactly what I knew all along anyway Mr. Bullshitter...


----------



## Trakar (Aug 21, 2011)

daveman said:


> Trakar said:
> 
> 
> > daveman said:
> ...



Please indicate anywhere that I indicated or implied that "alternative sources aren't economically feasible without being propped up by the government."

What I said is that government subsidies of private ventures designed to generate private profits "undermines the basic economic principles of a free-market system, and is a corporate welfare system designed to create and sustain market failures."

Not making the coal industry pay the public costs of its product's environmental damages, are also demonstrative of inefficiencies and market failures. 

In a free and functional market, there would be no government subsidization of any company's profits, and all participants in the market would be obligated to cover all of the the costs (private and public) of their services and products before they earn profits on those services and products. 

There are multiple clean energy alternatives (including nuclear, IMO) which could be viable and competitive with fossil fuels under viable and functional free market conditions.


----------



## daveman (Aug 22, 2011)

Trakar said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Trakar said:
> ...


If alternative sources could stand on their own, they would.

But they can't.  They have to be propped up with tax dollars.

Do you dispute this?


----------



## gslack (Aug 22, 2011)

Trakar said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Trakar said:
> ...



LOL everytime you get called on being a bullshitter you try this... You ask people to point to where you said or did this or that, or what part or where in something they do not get or you were wrong. When they do that you either ignore the post altogether or you keep on talking like they didn't do it...

You are now officially ridiculous and a posturing idiot...


----------



## Chris (Aug 22, 2011)

Record Events for Mon Aug 15, 2011 through Sun Aug 21, 2011 
Total Records: 1841 
Rainfall: 486 
High Temperatures: 581 
Low Temperatures: 93 
Lowest Max Temperatures: 79 
Highest Min Temperatures: 602 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## skookerasbil (Aug 23, 2011)

Chris said:


> Record Events for Mon Aug 15, 2011 through Sun Aug 21, 2011
> Total Records: 1841
> Rainfall: 486
> High Temperatures: 581
> ...











Keep teeing it up for me s0n....................


----------



## Old Rocks (Aug 23, 2011)

daveman said:


> Trakar said:
> 
> 
> > daveman said:
> ...



And why are we subsidizing oil and coal to the tune of billions of dollars? 

And, yes, I dispute that contention. Wind is already cheaper than dirty coal, even when there are no penelties on the coal for the evironmental damage associated with the mining and burning of coal.

Solar will soon be cheaper than coal as well. Geothermal, the same. As world wide demand for oil rises, electrical vehicles, hybrid and pure, will become more and more economically feasable. Especially for those individuals that are producing their own power.

Fossil fuels are where the horse was in 1910. Still in use, but the future is pretty clear.


----------



## daveman (Aug 23, 2011)

Old Rocks said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Trakar said:
> ...


Then you dispute reality.

Good luck getting your alternative sources to replace half the power generated in this nation.


----------



## Old Rocks (Aug 23, 2011)

At present, alternative energy is 48% of new generation being added. And that is almost all wind. As solar and geothermal come into play, that percentage will increase very rapidly.

From 1999 to 2010, an increase in generating capacity for wind from 2 GW to over 40 GW. And rapidly increasing as we post.


----------



## gslack (Aug 23, 2011)

Old Rocks said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Trakar said:
> ...



Coal subsidizing is done so to compensate coal industries who have coal to use, have access to coal to mine and produce but do not do so to allow for those alternative fuel sources you cry for...

You know this just as well as I do. Now stop being a buffoon about it. You can't pull this shit as yourself or your alter-egos, so get over it.

Africa has a massive amount of coal they are paid NOT to use by the UN's World Bank. You freaking idiotic algorians beg for alternative fuel sources and a fair chance for them to work, forcing the subsidization of coal and then have the unmitigated Gaul to try and point to coal subsidies as a cost prohibitive for coal use....

You people have no shame at all.....


----------



## Old Rocks (Aug 23, 2011)

The coal industry should and must be shut down, period. The environmental damage, and the damage to the health of the citizens of this nation mandate that. All the value of that industry should now go to ameliorating the damage that it has done in this nation.

Coals time is done.


----------



## gslack (Aug 23, 2011)

Old Rocks said:


> The coal industry should and must be shut down, period. The environmental damage, and the damage to the health of the citizens of this nation mandate that. All the value of that industry should now go to ameliorating the damage that it has done in this nation.
> 
> Coals time is done.



Careful GreenPeace, you let your agenda show again...

Okay then lets stop subsidizing coal then and let them make as much of it as they want and lets see how well your BS alternatives do shall we?


----------



## Chris (Aug 24, 2011)

Record Events for Wed Aug 17, 2011 through Tue Aug 23, 2011 
Total Records: 1862 
Rainfall: 343 
High Temperatures: 665 
Low Temperatures: 53 
Lowest Max Temperatures: 44 
Highest Min Temperatures: 757 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## daveman (Aug 24, 2011)

Old Rocks said:


> The coal industry should and must be shut down, period. The environmental damage, and the damage to the health of the citizens of this nation mandate that. All the value of that industry should now go to ameliorating the damage that it has done in this nation.
> 
> Coals time is done.


Go to your breaker box and turn off every other one.

There.  Your house represents the United States.  The breakers you shut off represent the half of our power that comes from coal.  Now turn on a Mini Maglite.  That AA-powered flashlight represents alternative sources.

Now, try to continue your life that way.

Remember:  You want that for the entire nation.  

When are you going to get it through your thick skull that your alternative sources simply can't replace coal?

History suggests "never".


----------



## Chris (Aug 26, 2011)

Record Events for Fri Aug 19, 2011 through Thu Aug 25, 2011 
Total Records: 2692 
Rainfall: 426 
High Temperatures: 1145 
Low Temperatures: 28 
Lowest Max Temperatures: 52 
Highest Min Temperatures: 1041 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## FactFinder (Aug 26, 2011)

*More record temps *

Damn glad I don't live in one of those places. Wher are those places anyways? 

Oh yeah, the elusive ones where GW is present. Good thing it is not a global phenomena.


----------



## Old Rocks (Aug 27, 2011)

UAH Global Temperature Update July, 2011: +0.37 deg. C « Roy Spencer, Ph. D.

And the Arctic Ice minimum for 2011 is now in second place to that of 2007. And may well be lower than that of 2007 in a couple of weeks.

http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/cryosphere/IMAGES/seaice.area.arctic.png


----------



## Chris (Aug 27, 2011)

Record Events for Sat Aug 20, 2011 through Fri Aug 26, 2011 

High Temperatures: 1208 
Low Temperatures: 27 
Lowest Max Temperatures: 50 
Highest Min Temperatures: 1112 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## Wicked Jester (Aug 28, 2011)

FactFinder said:


> *More record temps *
> 
> Damn glad I don't live in one of those places. Wher are those places anyways?
> 
> Oh yeah, the elusive ones where GW is present. Good thing it is not a global phenomena.


It's called summer time.


----------



## Trakar (Aug 28, 2011)

daveman said:


> Your house represents the United States.  The breakers you shut off represent the half of our power that comes from coal.  Now turn on a Mini Maglite.  That AA-powered flashlight represents alternative sources.
> 
> Now, try to continue your life that way....



Seriously? All the breakers for your house represent coal powered electrical generation and a AA flashlight represents alternative sources?

As I look at the Electric Power Monthly - Table 1.1. Net Generation by Energy Source it looks like coal provides 45% of the electricity in the US annually, while alternative, non-carbon emitting  sources (nuclear, hydro, Wind, solar, geothermal, etc.,) provide 30% of the electricity in the US. If you could power your whole house with a handful of AA batteries, why do you need breakers?


----------



## Trakar (Aug 28, 2011)

daveman said:


> Trakar said:
> 
> 
> > daveman said:
> ...



What I dispute is the fact that we don't know if they can compete in a level market situation due to government subsidies for existent coal and oil energy systems. I believe that all systems should be made to compete equally within the market place. I don't think any profit making enterprise should be entitled to tax-payer subsidies. Either you believe in free markets with even handed regulation, or you don't.


----------



## daveman (Aug 28, 2011)

Trakar said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Your house represents the United States.  The breakers you shut off represent the half of our power that comes from coal.  Now turn on a Mini Maglite.  That AA-powered flashlight represents alternative sources.
> ...



Ahh, but all those sources aren't embraced by the enviorunts, are they?

Nuclear's out.  It's Satan's toe jam.

Hydroelectric?  No way!  It gets in the way of fish humping!

Geothermal?  No can do.  Takes too much water.

No, they've bet other people's farms on wind and solar.  And from your link, "other renewables" is "Wood, black liquor, other wood waste, biogenic municipal solid waste, landfill gas, sludge waste, agriculture byproducts, other biomass, geothermal, solar thermal, photovoltaic energy, and wind."  

Percentage of power created by these other renewables was 4.2% of all power generated Feb '10 - Feb '11.

Any method that burns stuff is _verboten_, so the amount of power generated by acceptable green sources is even less.

So:  Acceptable green sources simply aren't up to replacing coal.  It would be _astoundingly_ stupid to legislate coal out of use.


----------



## daveman (Aug 28, 2011)

Trakar said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Trakar said:
> ...


I have no problem with that.  Make all sources compete on the market, and watch wind and solar fade away.


----------



## Trakar (Aug 28, 2011)

daveman said:


> Trakar said:
> 
> 
> > daveman said:
> ...



That's half the battle, now what about the externalities? Should all people be held to account for their actions? Should some people be able to generate record breaking profits while contributing to a hugely troubling and dangerous situation that is going to cost additional tax dollars to deal with those issues? If there's any leeway to grant its that not much of anyone paid any serious attention to the early climate scientists when they started talking about these issues a century and half ago. I don't think they should be grandfathered into paying a contrition for what they have done in the past, but for each ton of carbon tuel they are selling, they need to pay a carbon tax to help deal with the atmospheric carbon enhancement that ton of fuel represents. When coal becomes to expensive, energy companies will invest in more price competitive alternatives. 

Personally, I'd rather see a heavy temporary shift to Natural Gas systems which while still carbon fuelled, are much cleaner and easier to scale so that we can go more with distributed local power networks along with a doubling of our nuclear power capacity to bring it up more into the 40-50% level. The rest will evolve as the market guides it over the next few decades.


----------



## daveman (Aug 28, 2011)

Trakar said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Trakar said:
> ...


Carbon tax?  Nonsense.  AGW is junk science.  Don't wreck the economy based on garbage.


----------



## Old Rocks (Aug 29, 2011)

Junk science embraced by about 97% of scientists. Sure, Daveboy, sure.

Virtually all the Scientific Socities, National Academies of Science, and major Universities state that AGW is real, and a clear and present danger.

The effects of AGW are going to do a very good job of wrecking everybodies economy, sooner than later.


----------



## daveman (Aug 29, 2011)

Old Rocks said:


> Junk science embraced by about 97% of scientists. Sure, Daveboy, sure.
> 
> Virtually all the Scientific Socities, National Academies of Science, and major Universities state that AGW is real, and a clear and present danger.
> 
> The effects of AGW are going to do a very good job of wrecking everybodies economy, sooner than later.



You really need to pay attention, Roxy...but then, if you paid attention, you wouldn't be an AGW cultist.

All these scientists whose hosannas you sing are operating off the same distorted, cherrypicked  data and faulty models.  Of course they'd reach the same conclusions.  

Idiot.


----------



## Old Rocks (Aug 29, 2011)

LOL. All the scientists all over the world are in on a conspiracy to mislead poor little Daveboy. Never mind the differant culteral and political systems they are from. Never mind that they are looking at data and observations from areas as diverse as the polar regions and tropical rain forests, and coming to the same conclusions.

Daveboy, don't lose that little tinfoil hat, you look so cute in it.


----------



## edthecynic (Aug 29, 2011)

daveman said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> > Junk science embraced by about 97% of scientists. Sure, Daveboy, sure.
> ...


And you know this because the deniers have the only accurate data.
Oh wait a minute, deniers have NO data. They just pontificate about everyone else's data.


----------



## daveman (Aug 29, 2011)

Old Rocks said:


> LOL. All the scientists all over the world are in on a conspiracy to mislead poor little Daveboy. Never mind the differant culteral and political systems they are from. Never mind that they are looking at data and observations from areas as diverse as the polar regions and tropical rain forests, and coming to the same conclusions.
> 
> Daveboy, don't lose that little tinfoil hat, you look so cute in it.


Yes, that's right, Roxy.  We're all gonna die.  World socialism is the only thing that can save us.


----------



## daveman (Aug 29, 2011)

edthecynic said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Old Rocks said:
> ...


Deniers can see the cultists' data, and how it's been manipulated.  

Cultists won't see it.


----------



## Trakar (Aug 29, 2011)

daveman said:


> Trakar said:
> 
> 
> > daveman said:
> ...



So, you are saying that some people shouldn't have to pay all of the costs associated with their actions? That we should raise taxes on all individual citizens to pay for the profit making actions of these few individuals? Either you believe in the free market system and principles of individual responsibility or you don't. If you don't believe in those principles don't espouse them as solutions, if you do believe in them then you have to accept all the premises that are a part of those systems.


----------



## daveman (Aug 29, 2011)

Trakar said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Trakar said:
> ...


Is that what I said?

Hint:  "No."


----------



## Wicked Jester (Aug 29, 2011)

Old Rocks said:


> Junk science embraced by about 97% of scientists. Sure, Daveboy, sure.
> 
> Virtually all the Scientific Socities, National Academies of Science, and major Universities state that AGW is real, and a clear and present danger.
> 
> The effects of AGW are going to do a very good job of wrecking everybodies economy, sooner than later.


97% of ALL scientists?........Really?........Got a link with credible sources to prove that load of BS?

Yeah, that's what I thought.


----------



## gslack (Aug 29, 2011)

Trakar said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Trakar said:
> ...



I cannot figure out if you're seriously not seeing the problem with your arguments fundamentally, or if you are just wanting to argue somehow...

The very reason for the subsidies is to give alternative sources as fair a chance as they can. This was caused by the alternative sources respective lobbyists and the environmental groups and people pressuring the government and industries involved. People on YOUR side of this caused this... So now you are wanting to remove the subsidies your side worked so hard to get so your side will get a fair shot?

Dude seriously you make no sense at all.. I think you just want to argue, this is another case of you arguing to argue. Again you make no valuable point at all and now you argue against what the very people supporting your case argue for....


----------



## Chris (Aug 29, 2011)

Record Events for Mon Aug 22, 2011 through Sun Aug 28, 2011 

High Temperatures: 1487 
Low Temperatures: 25 
Lowest Max Temperatures: 44 
Highest Min Temperatures: 1242 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## daveman (Aug 29, 2011)

My tomato plants are dying.

ZOMG!!  Global tomato plant genocide!!


----------



## Chris (Aug 29, 2011)

Record Events for Mon Aug 22, 2011 through Sun Aug 28, 2011 

High Temperatures: 1487 
Low Temperatures: 25 
Lowest Max Temperatures: 47 
Highest Min Temperatures: 1283 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## daveman (Aug 30, 2011)

Parts of Britain suffer coldest summer for nearly two decades - Telegraph

As Britons return to work today after a soggy Bank Holiday weekend, official weather data reveals that average temperatures were significantly down on recent years.
The UKs average temperature from June 1 to August 15 was only 57F (13.9C)  the lowest for 13 years.
For central England the average was 59F (15C), making it the coolest summer since 1993.
Helen Waite, a Met Office forecaster, said: The average temperature for central England this summer has been just 15C  this sort of temperature is normally typical of September.
Generally speaking, you would expect to see temperatures of at least 17C for this time of year.​
Obviously, this is caused by global warming.


----------



## SW2SILVER (Aug 30, 2011)

Record hottest August temperatures on record in the US. Were do you live, Daveman? Just wondering.  It has been hotter than hell here in the US.  But how odd that it also coincides with the record population growth AND growing pollution from those same record numbers of people...  Some of the  folks that argue against human caused global warming seem to have  more concern with profits and the well-being of the "economy" than they are with scientific standards of exactitude. If the planet dies, the economy won&#8217;t do so bloody well, will it? But, why bother with the long term?


----------



## Meister (Aug 30, 2011)

SW2SILVER said:


> Record hottest August temperatures on record in the US. Were do you live, Daveman? Just wondering.  It has been hotter than hell here in the US.  But how odd that it also coincides with the record population growth AND growing pollution from those same record numbers of people...  Some of the  folks that argue against human caused global warming seem to have  more concern with profits and the well-being of the "economy" than they are with scientific standards of exactitude. If the planet dies, the economy wont do so bloody well, will it? But, why bother with the long term?



It's the people and not the Sun, I see.


----------



## westwall (Aug 30, 2011)

Trakar said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Trakar said:
> ...







Ahhh, it's so refreshing to see the socialists raise their heads above the sand.  In answer to your question.  No.  the whole of society benefits from their actions at producing energy.
Without energy you are back to living in your cave.


----------



## SW2SILVER (Aug 30, 2011)

Meister said:


> SW2SILVER said:
> 
> 
> > Record hottest August temperatures on record in the US. Were do you live, Daveman? Just wondering.  It has been hotter than hell here in the US.  But how odd that it also coincides with the record population growth AND growing pollution from those same record numbers of people...  Some of the  folks that argue against human caused global warming seem to have  more concern with profits and the well-being of the "economy" than they are with scientific standards of exactitude. If the planet dies, the economy won&#8217;t do so bloody well, will it? But, why bother with the long term?
> ...




Don't make things so personal. I don't think you have much scientific curiosity, I think you are more the simplistic  dogmatic type.  Yeah, it&#8217;s  the PEOPLE. The sun has been around through many an ICE AGE, too. So? We are the wild card in the equation,  Einstein.  Put 2 + 2 together.


----------



## westwall (Aug 30, 2011)

SW2SILVER said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> > SW2SILVER said:
> ...








Actually, it's the warmists who so lack scientific curiosity that they prevent studies from being published that disagree with the AGW paradigm.  If that's your version of science then we know exactly how little you truly care about real science and just how much you believe in the religious dogma of the cult of AGW.


----------



## Meister (Aug 30, 2011)

SW2SILVER said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> > SW2SILVER said:
> ...



Scientific curiosity...I have quite a bit of that.  We aren't any kind of "WILD CARD", "Einstein".
The Sun has played into a lot of heating and cooling throughout millions of years, and it's the self proclaimed "AGW religion" that comes to the conclusion that it's the evil people that causes the warming through manipulated data. Funny what socialists and communists can come up with, ain't it?  Yes....try and add that 2+2...I laugh at you.


----------



## SW2SILVER (Aug 30, 2011)

The sun hasn't changed in billions of years, it isn't any hotter nor is it any closer. Given  ALL the possible variables,  effluent produced by record numbers of humans HAS increased in record numbers. THAT is  a DEFINITE   factor here. That can not be denied. That is common sense and quite obvious, as well. I have seen the weather changes in the last thirty years. No bull. I am not a "denier'. Tis'  is the other way around, here.  My point isn&#8217;t to make you look or feel foolish, it&#8217;s  that I am alarmed  at the changes I have seen,  they most certainly are negative and they are more than likely the result of  Human overpopulation.


----------



## Mr.Nick (Aug 30, 2011)

SW2SILVER said:


> The sun hasn't changed in billions of years, it isn't any hotter nor is it any closer. Given  ALL the possible variables,  effluent produced by record numbers of humans HAS increased in record numbers. THAT is  a DEFINITE   factor here. That can not be denied. That is common sense and quite obvious, as well. I have seen the weather changes in the last thirty years. No bull. I am not a "denier'. Tis'  is the other way around, here.  My point isnt to make you look or feel foolish, its  that I am alarmed  at the changes I have seen,  they most certainly are negative and they are more than likely the result of  Human overpopulation.



Of course the sun has changed and does change.

Solar storm - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The sun is anything but stable.


----------



## Meister (Aug 30, 2011)

SW2SILVER said:


> The sun hasn't changed in billions of years, it isn't any hotter nor is it any closer. Given  ALL the possible variables,  effluent produced by record numbers of humans HAS increased in record numbers. THAT is  a DEFINITE   factor here. That can not be denied. That is common sense and quite obvious, as well. I have seen the weather changes in the last thirty years. No bull. I am not a "denier'. Tis'  is the other way around, here.  My point isn&#8217;t to make you look or feel foolish, it&#8217;s  that I am alarmed  at the changes I have seen,  they most certainly are negative and they are more than likely the result of  Human overpopulation.



Your point is MAKING YOU look foolish.  Our world is constantly changing in regards to temperature variation.  We didn't get the ice ages and melts with no temperature variations.  And your vision over the last 30 years compared to the last 4-5 billion years cannot be taken seriously...that IS "common sense".


----------



## SW2SILVER (Aug 30, 2011)

How do I respond to that? Of course things change, that is what I am saying here.  The sun cools, it heats but it&#8217;s average temperature hasn&#8217;t been the issue here,  it&#8217;s been the Earth&#8217;s. Tell me, Meister, how old are you?  Can you tell me, for instance, in the last thirty years, it&#8217;s  getting cooler and wetter?   Yes? That would be nice, someone can contradict the facts. And good for you. Unless you find some fluke somewhere,  nobody else is getting those results here in the  United States. Global Warming&#8230;No solar menstrual periods, either. You never answered my assertion: WHAT about human pollution due to Human over population? Is that just a big coinki-dink?


----------



## SW2SILVER (Aug 30, 2011)

Anyone here actually feel that, in their lifetime, that the average temperatures  have remained the same or gotten COOLER? Were do you live? How old are you, if you don't mind saying? Lets have a little informal poll.


----------



## Meister (Aug 30, 2011)

SW2SILVER said:


> How do I respond to that? Of course things change, that is what I am saying here.  The sun cools, it heats but its average temperature hasnt been the issue here,  its been the Earths. Tell me, Meister, how old are you?  Can you tell me, for instance, in the last thirty years, its  getting cooler and wetter?   Yes? That would be nice, someone can contradict the facts. And good for you. Unless you find some fluke somewhere,  nobody else is getting those results here in the  United States. Global WarmingNo solar menstrual periods, either. You never answered my assertion: WHAT about human pollution due to Human over population? Is that just a big coinki-dink?



Dude, the Earth heats and it cools.   Human caused pollution plays a minuscule part of the heating of the Earth.  Natural causes effect the Earth's temperature more than anything we can do.
As for my age, I have a feeling that I'm older than you are.


----------



## ScienceRocks (Aug 30, 2011)

The sun has grown brighter and "warmer" over the past billion years and should keep doing so. The sun also has decreases and increases within its means output in tsi. Not only this, but the obrit has a lot to do with how much energy this planet gets too. So yes there are cycles within climate.

Has our climate warmed since the little ice age, you bet. But you can also name many warm periods that around where we're today.


----------



## SW2SILVER (Aug 30, 2011)

Maybe, "DUDE".  You never answered my query, either. You equivocate like a liberal. But, never mind. I am 53. Denver, Colorado, and, RECORD high temps for August here. Low Precipitation. YOU?


----------



## westwall (Aug 30, 2011)

SW2SILVER said:


> The sun hasn't changed in billions of years, it isn't any hotter nor is it any closer. Given  ALL the possible variables,  effluent produced by record numbers of humans HAS increased in record numbers. THAT is  a DEFINITE   factor here. That can not be denied. That is common sense and quite obvious, as well. I have seen the weather changes in the last thirty years. No bull. I am not a "denier'. Tis'  is the other way around, here.  My point isnt to make you look or feel foolish, its  that I am alarmed  at the changes I have seen,  they most certainly are negative and they are more than likely the result of  Human overpopulation.







I guess you aren't realy all that scientifically literate are you?  I suggest you Google sun phases, and storms, UV output, IR output, etc.  You will be amazed out how little you know about the Sun.  The Sun is ALLWAYS changing.  It is never stagnant.  But if you weren't so dogmatically blind you would know that


----------



## Meister (Aug 30, 2011)

SW2SILVER said:


> Maybe, "DUDE".  You never answered my query, either. You equivocate like a liberal. But, never mind. I am 53. Denver, Colorado, and, RECORD high temps for August here. YOU?



Coeur d'Alene, Idaho, and haven't had a record breaking day here for highs this year....but we did have a couple of records broken for the latest day in the year to reach 70 and 80.
Thanks for the liberal insult.  By the way...I am older than you by a few years.


----------



## westwall (Aug 30, 2011)

SW2SILVER said:


> How do I respond to that? Of course things change, that is what I am saying here.  The sun cools, it heats but its average temperature hasnt been the issue here,  its been the Earths. Tell me, Meister, how old are you?  Can you tell me, for instance, in the last thirty years, its  getting cooler and wetter?   Yes? That would be nice, someone can contradict the facts. And good for you. Unless you find some fluke somewhere,  nobody else is getting those results here in the  United States. Global WarmingNo solar menstrual periods, either. You never answered my assertion: WHAT about human pollution due to Human over population? Is that just a big coinki-dink?








  Ask yourself the same question pal!  The Earth has had major temperature swings over the last 3000 years, all well documented in both the paleo- climate and historical record.  In both the Roman and Medieval Warming Periods the temperature of the planet was warmer then the present day and the increase was global, once again supported by over 100 peer reviewed studies.

YOURS is the only group that demands that we ignore everything that has happened before and concentrate solely on the last 30 years as if those years are meaningful.
Get a clue, your religion is collapsing around your ears.  Even George Norri (sp?) on Coast to Coast AM and once a ardent supporter of global weirding had Dr. Tim Ball on last night.


----------



## SW2SILVER (Aug 30, 2011)

Westwall: YOU are not three thousand years old. Is the world getting warmer according to YOU? From you own experience? Yes or no?  Is that too hard to answer?  Were are you from & how old are you, can I ask? Is that a bother?


----------



## SW2SILVER (Aug 30, 2011)

Meister said:


> SW2SILVER said:
> 
> 
> > Maybe, "DUDE".  You never answered my query, either. You equivocate like a liberal. But, never mind. I am 53. Denver, Colorado, and, RECORD high temps for August here. YOU?
> ...



I am moving to Idaho, no illegal aliens AND  perfect weather, too.  WOW , How do ya manage to avoid  the same afflictions that plague  the rest of rest of America? Smugness?  Good for you! You will never understand what an ironic post this is from me...


----------



## westwall (Aug 30, 2011)

SW2SILVER said:


> Maybe, "DUDE".  You never answered my query, either. You equivocate like a liberal. But, never mind. I am 53. Denver, Colorado, and, RECORD high temps for August here. Low Precipitation. YOU?







Unseasonably cool.  In fact we've had but a single day at 100 degrees.  FAR below normal.
Precip is low for August but we still have snow in the mountains and in fact I went snowshoeing on July 4th.  The latest I've ever been able to do that.  It is however not the latest that it has been done.  This last winter we got 180% of our normal snow fall.  Some areas almost reached 200% of average.  The last weekend of spring we had 7 feet of snow drop in 2 days.

The point?  None.  It's called weather.  It changes.  It has allways changed.  Only scientific illiterates believe that the climate of the Earth is static.   Amazingly enough they also don't know how to crack a history book.  NOTHING THAT IS REGARDED AS AMAZING TRULY IS>  EVERYTHING THAT THE AGW CULTISTS CLAIM AS EVIDENCE OF GLOBAL WARMING HAS HAPPENED MANY TIMES BEFORE.   It is illustrative of their myopic POV that they can't understand that the planet operates on a time scale far slower then mans life.  It takes hundreds of years for things to complete their course.


----------



## westwall (Aug 30, 2011)

SW2SILVER said:


> Westwall: YOU are not three thousand years old. Is the world getting warmer according to YOU? From you own experience? Yes or no?  Is that too hard to answer?  Were are you from & how old are you, can I ask? Is that a bother?







I am a PhD geologist so probably am more conversant in science (especially Earth Science) then you.  If not please accept my apologies.  I have studied the Earth and how it operates for 47 years or so now (I just turned 65 so am likewise older then you) and can state with no concern that everything that is happening now has happened before without mans interference or initiation.  Many, many, many times before.


----------



## westwall (Aug 30, 2011)

SW2SILVER said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> > SW2SILVER said:
> ...







I don't recall Meister ever mentioning illegal aliens in this thread (or any other for that matter, I believe Meister chose Idaho for the exceptional fishing to be found there, of course if you weren't an arrogant ass you could have asked him, or just as easily looked at his personal page and seen the big honkin fish he had just caught, but no, you had to revert to form and toss off an insult.  Typical....oh so typical of you folks.


----------



## SW2SILVER (Aug 30, 2011)

It&#8217;s Hotter here in the Midwest, but, it&#8217;s  just cooler in Idaho, magically? Something isn&#8217;t adding up here. I don't  believe you,  westwall. Or, perhaps, it&#8217;s a fluke, or you are lying? I could JUST look it up, ya know. I  have nothing to gain, YOU? If I am wrong I will admit it. I mentioned Illegal aliens, because I live with BOTH them and global warming. This is a constant of the  elitists that promote profits over rationality. But I  digress, THAT was way off topic.


----------



## ScienceRocks (Aug 30, 2011)

SW2SILVER said:


> It&#8217;s Hotter here in the Midwest, but, it&#8217;s  just cooler in Idaho, magically? Something isn&#8217;t adding up here. I don't  believe you,  westwall. Or, perhaps, it&#8217;s a fluke, or you are lying? I could JUST look it up, ya know. I  have nothing to gain, YOU? If I am wrong I will admit it. I mentioned Illegal aliens, because I live with BOTH them and global warming. This is a constant of the  elitists that promote profits over rationality. But I  digress, THAT was way off topic.



Well the reason it's so hot within the midwest is because of a large area of high pressure centered over Texas that has been centered there for the past 3-4 months. What a high pressure does is increase pressure within the air column throughout the Atmosphere...It does this through as the air "convergences" at 200-300 millibar level or 30,000-50,000 feet within the Atmosphere and divergences clockwise within the northern Hemisphere at the surface(surface pressure). What this does is cause the air to sink or decrease within its moisture(latent heat) and causes the lapse rate to warm as the air flows from the Atmosphere to the surface. This decreases cloud cover and so you have 1# sunny weather 2# hotter weather with little clouds. 

This area of high pressure has sat there for months forcing the jet stream to the northern United states and southern Canada, while the west coast has been within cold weather within a dip within the jet stream. The opposite occurs with low pressure with the air convergences at the surface and removes the air as it rises and forms the clouds from a decrease within the lapse rate and condenses as it goes from a evaporation to condensation. That is a stage change. 

Your area is hot for a reason and westwall and my area is cool for a reason. All to do with weather.


----------



## westwall (Aug 30, 2011)

What Matthew posted was correct.  More importantly the reason the weather patterns have frozen is because the Arctic is cooling and that has shifted the Jet Stream into its current position.  And I don't lie.  I may make a mistake and if I do I will acknowledge that fact as soon as I am made aware of it.  So far the only people caught lying have been the AGW cultists, and that many, many, many times.  Look it up some day, you'll be amazed at the shenanigans that the climatologists have been pulling....but only if you don't have blinders on.


----------



## Meister (Aug 30, 2011)

SW2SILVER said:


> It&#8217;s Hotter here in the Midwest, but, it&#8217;s  just cooler in Idaho, magically? Something isn&#8217;t adding up here. I don't  believe you,  westwall. Or, perhaps, it&#8217;s a fluke, or you are lying? I could JUST look it up, ya know. I  have nothing to gain, YOU? If I am wrong I will admit it. I mentioned Illegal aliens, because I live with BOTH them and global warming. This is a constant of the  elitists that promote profits over rationality. But I  digress, THAT was way off topic.



Magically? Really?  What has to add up between the two different places for you?
Could it be that it's not AGW, and just different weather patterns like it's always been?
Don't believe me?...look at this 

http://www.wunderground.com/cgi-bin/findweather/getForecast?query=Coeur d'Alene, Idaho


----------



## SW2SILVER (Aug 30, 2011)

Matthew said:


> SW2SILVER said:
> 
> 
> > Its Hotter here in the Midwest, but, its  just cooler in Idaho, magically? Something isnt adding up here. I don't  believe you,  westwall. Or, perhaps, its a fluke, or you are lying? I could JUST look it up, ya know. I  have nothing to gain, YOU? If I am wrong I will admit it. I mentioned Illegal aliens, because I live with BOTH them and global warming. This is a constant of the  elitists that promote profits over rationality. But I  digress, THAT was way off topic.
> ...



Random chance? Gods will, maybe?  Dont know, but it is HOTTER than H-E double hockey sticks here . IT IS warmer than the summers of my childhood, the gentle rains,  all that, gone . Gone. The plains are baking.  NOW. And there are  far more people NOW than forty years ago, and far less rains. More housing developments, less prairie, less meadows and  far more condos, more  realtors selling land, more people. The world has reached  some 7 billion people. That is insane. And to pretend that THAT hasnt got something to do  with our predicament? Denial.


----------



## westwall (Aug 30, 2011)

SW2SILVER said:


> Matthew said:
> 
> 
> > SW2SILVER said:
> ...






And twenty years from now it will be back to what you remembered.  There you go with that denial bullshit again.  The only people denying anything is you.  Yes the world has 7 billion people on it.  Guess what it can support 20 billion with comparitive ease.  23 billion with some work.  40 billion with some serious effort.  Malthus was wrong because he ignored a simple thing called technology.  

100 years ago a drought like we are experiencing now would have killed thousands.   Now the only people who die do so because their governments either allow it to happen or want it to happen.  40 years ago we were all told that the carrying capacity of the planet would be reached by 1980.

Paul Ehrlich has been so spectacularly wrong about everything he's ever opened his mouth about that only the truly religious fanatics still listen to him.  Well them and the socialists who think we should be killing off people at the rate of 300,000 or so a day like Jaques Costeau once advocated.

You see, the only people who talk like you do are the scientifically illiterate who believe they know what is best for everyone.  People like James Cameron who lives in his palatial mansion but thinks you should live in a hovel because you aren't one of the "elite".  They all sound the same don't they?

Here's a wake up call for you.  The population of the world has been levelling off and it will most likely stabalise at around 9-10 billion.  That's assuming we do nothing.  If we actually try and end poverty in the world (and it can be done, just don't use the UN to atempt it) the population will drop.  Wealthy people don't need bunches of kids to help work the farm.  They have machines do that work for them.

You want to look at the problems of this world?  Look in the mirror.  You've been spoonfed a bunch of horseshit and you are so un interested in checking it out that you went to sleep.
You are a big part of the problem.  Wake up.  Educate yourself and start helping to fix the problems of this world.  Think globally act locally to make your local area better.  After enough people have done that the world will be a better place.







Herald-Journal - Google News Archive Search


----------



## SW2SILVER (Aug 30, 2011)

Meister said:


> SW2SILVER said:
> 
> 
> > It&#8217;s Hotter here in the Midwest, but, it&#8217;s  just cooler in Idaho, magically? Something isn&#8217;t adding up here. I don't  believe you,  westwall. Or, perhaps, it&#8217;s a fluke, or you are lying? I could JUST look it up, ya know. I  have nothing to gain, YOU? If I am wrong I will admit it. I mentioned Illegal aliens, because I live with BOTH them and global warming. This is a constant of the  elitists that promote profits over rationality. But I  digress, THAT was way off topic.
> ...




I&#8217;m sure Idaho is a wonderful place. I will try going there one day. To quote Chico Marx: &#8220; Who are ya gonna believe, ME our your eyes&#8221;? It&#8217;s like THAT. I believe what I see with my own two freaking eyeballs. Not websites YOU cherry pick. But, thanks for the reference.


----------



## SW2SILVER (Aug 30, 2011)

westwall said:


> SW2SILVER said:
> 
> 
> > Matthew said:
> ...



Beg to differ, but none of that will  come back. Not in our lifetime, anyway. Wake up? Too what? Globalism IS a delusion. It is madness created by people that don't know either nature or human nature. You are betting OUR future on a well meaning  pseudo  intellectual HUNCH. You are deluding yourself.


----------



## westwall (Aug 30, 2011)

SW2SILVER said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > SW2SILVER said:
> ...







You may beg all you wish but I see you are choosing to remain asleep.  Oh well, don't say I didn't warn ya!  Here's a prediction for you.  The world has entered a cooling phase that will last between 20 and 30 years.  It is driven by many factors (none of them anthropogenic) and will end as the last cycle did and then warming will begin again.  I hope I live long enough to witness the cycle repeat.


----------



## SW2SILVER (Aug 30, 2011)

Westwall: I wish you good health, perhaps we continue this anothertime, brother? Goodnight.


----------



## Meister (Aug 30, 2011)

SW2SILVER said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> > SW2SILVER said:
> ...



Look who's in denial


----------



## Meister (Aug 30, 2011)

Meister said:


> SW2SILVER said:
> 
> 
> > Meister said:
> ...



That "cherry picked website" is no more than a weather website.  Hardly cherry picked, and certainly not global warming.  Amazing  that you will believe facts that have been proven a fraud and still believe them.  That's  just amazing.


----------



## westwall (Aug 30, 2011)

Meister said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> > SW2SILVER said:
> ...








That's the nature of faith.  No matter what you tell a true believer they will allways figure out a way to rationalise it away.  Or simply ignore it because it makes their brain hurt.


----------



## westwall (Aug 30, 2011)

SW2SILVER said:


> Westwall: I wish you good health, perhaps we continue this anothertime, brother? Goodnight.






And I you, but I am not your brother (fortunately for you!) but I care about ALL people and want all people to do well.  Well not evil doers but that's a different thread.

Goodnight to you and yours.


----------



## Chris (Aug 30, 2011)

Record Events for Tue Aug 23, 2011 through Mon Aug 29, 2011 

High Temperatures: 1701 
Low Temperatures: 24 
Lowest Max Temperatures: 50 
Highest Min Temperatures: 1375 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## westwall (Aug 31, 2011)

Chris said:


> Record Events for Tue Aug 23, 2011 through Mon Aug 29, 2011
> 
> High Temperatures: 1701
> Low Temperatures: 24
> ...







Even the leopards find your posts tedious


----------



## skookerasbil (Aug 31, 2011)

Chris said:


> Record Events for Tue Aug 23, 2011 through Mon Aug 29, 2011
> 
> High Temperatures: 1701
> Low Temperatures: 24
> ...


----------



## daveman (Aug 31, 2011)

SW2SILVER said:


> Record hottest August temperatures on record in the US. Were do you live, Daveman? Just wondering.  It has been hotter than hell here in the US.  But how odd that it also coincides with the record population growth AND growing pollution from those same record numbers of people...  Some of the  folks that argue against human caused global warming seem to have  more concern with profits and the well-being of the "economy" than they are with scientific standards of exactitude. If the planet dies, the economy wont do so bloody well, will it? But, why bother with the long term?


I live in Kentucky.  Yes, it's been hot here, too.

And no, weather is not climate, no matter how loudly the Chicken Littles (*coughChriscough*) squawk.  Correlation is not causation.


----------



## daveman (Aug 31, 2011)

SW2SILVER said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> > SW2SILVER said:
> ...


Wow.  You call that "science"?

Because it's not.


----------



## daveman (Aug 31, 2011)

SW2SILVER said:


> The sun hasn't changed in billions of years, it isn't any hotter nor is it any closer. Given  ALL the possible variables,  effluent produced by record numbers of humans HAS increased in record numbers. THAT is  a DEFINITE   factor here. That can not be denied. That is common sense and quite obvious, as well. I have seen the weather changes in the last thirty years. No bull. I am not a "denier'. Tis'  is the other way around, here.  My point isnt to make you look or feel foolish, its  that I am alarmed  at the changes I have seen,  they most certainly are negative and they are more than likely the result of  Human overpopulation.



So what are you, personally, doing about it?  NOTE:  Posting on the internet doesn't count.


----------



## daveman (Aug 31, 2011)

SW2SILVER said:


> Westwall: YOU are not three thousand years old. Is the world getting warmer according to YOU? From you own experience? Yes or no?  Is that too hard to answer?  Were are you from & how old are you, can I ask? Is that a bother?


*sigh*

How old is the Earth?  How long do climate cycles last?

Thirty years is the blink of an eye.  You may as well be saying that since it's warmer in the afternoon than at sunrise, that's proof of global warming.


----------



## daveman (Aug 31, 2011)

SW2SILVER said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> > SW2SILVER said:
> ...


So, his weather extremes don't count.  Only places with record high temps do.

Okay, you're dismissed.


----------



## daveman (Aug 31, 2011)

Matthew said:


> SW2SILVER said:
> 
> 
> > Its Hotter here in the Midwest, but, its  just cooler in Idaho, magically? Something isnt adding up here. I don't  believe you,  westwall. Or, perhaps, its a fluke, or you are lying? I could JUST look it up, ya know. I  have nothing to gain, YOU? If I am wrong I will admit it. I mentioned Illegal aliens, because I live with BOTH them and global warming. This is a constant of the  elitists that promote profits over rationality. But I  digress, THAT was way off topic.
> ...


Hey!  No fair using science in a global warming thread!


----------



## Chris (Aug 31, 2011)

Record Events for Wed Aug 24, 2011 through Tue Aug 30, 2011 

High Temperatures: 1702 
Low Temperatures: 25 
Lowest Max Temperatures: 47 
Highest Min Temperatures: 1329 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## daveman (Aug 31, 2011)

In my welding lab tonight, localized temperatures approached 9,000° F.

Obvious proof of global warming.


----------



## OohPooPahDoo (Sep 1, 2011)

westwall said:


> After reviewing three "studies" and observing the lack of scientific rigour, then witnessing the continuing falsification of the historical record it is no longer neccessary to read anything from climate 'mafia'.  They have demonstrated their complete lack of scientific ethics so they no longer matter.



Do these "studies" have names? Can we "read" them in order to judge for ourselves? What "points" in particular, in the "studies", lack scientific "rigor" and "why" "?"


-"the most"


----------



## westwall (Sep 1, 2011)

OohPooPahDoo said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > After reviewing three "studies" and observing the lack of scientific rigour, then witnessing the continuing falsification of the historical record it is no longer neccessary to read anything from climate 'mafia'.  They have demonstrated their complete lack of scientific ethics so they no longer matter.
> ...







The studies are those from the  post I quoted.  Feel free to review them yourself.


----------



## Chris (Sep 1, 2011)

Record Events for Thu Aug 25, 2011 through Wed Aug 31, 2011 

High Temperatures: 1603 
Low Temperatures: 24 
Lowest Max Temperatures: 63 
Highest Min Temperatures: 1283 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## OohPooPahDoo (Sep 1, 2011)

westwall said:


> OohPooPahDoo said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...



"the post I quoted" sounds deliberately vague.

Doesn't sound like you're very familiar with the studies you so vaguely refer to. You can't even point to one specific thing you have a problem with. I doubt you've actually read them yourself. Usually when I read a paper and understand it, I at least remember enough that I can recite the top authors and the year.


----------



## westwall (Sep 1, 2011)

OohPooPahDoo said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > OohPooPahDoo said:
> ...







For a PhD candidate you are remarkably unobservant.   I suggest you go back to the source.  It's a few pages back.  I'm sure you're capable of finding it.


----------



## westwall (Sep 1, 2011)

And while it's been warm here in the central US (but cold here in northern Nevada and seemingly the entire west coast) it has been a very chilly winter in Ireland.  It appears to be the coldest since 1851.....





"ONE of our coldest summers ever has been followed by the coldest August in 25 years.

Following an "unspectacular summer" of the coldest June in nearly 40 years and the coldest July in 50 years, this month is now one of the coldest since records began in 1851.

The last time temperatures for the month were as low was when the country was struck by Hurricane Charley in 1986 and witnessed record rainfall and flooding.

Met Eireann records show temperatures have been up to 1.3C below average this month at all 10 of its stations across the country. The lowest temperature has been a nippy 2.7C in Mullingar, with highest temperatures across the nation ranging from 15-17C, at best.

A forecaster for Met Eireann said: "While the current weather hasn't been brilliant, it hasn't been a bad summer.

"It has been very cool but it hasn't been a wet one and rainfall is well below average in most places."

Early season sunny spells were soon forgotten about and the maximum temperature this summer only managed to be 25.5C in Co Carlow, on June 3.

The last time Ireland's peak summer temperature was so low was 46 years ago when the top temperature was 25.2C.

Met Eireann said Dublin's main weather station, at the airport, averaged just 13.8C, the coldest since July 1965, which saw 13.1C.

A forecast for the next seven days shows that the current situation is not due to change and is described as "unsettled".

Any suggestions that the current weather dip is building up for winter were dismissed with Met Eireann saying it has no bearing on what can be expected towards the end of the year.

- David Whelan

Irish Independent"



What summer? August was coldest in 25 years - National News, Frontpage - Independent.ie


----------



## SW2SILVER (Sep 1, 2011)

I am a frustrated  AMERICAN right now. I AM no freaking dumbass liberal, so loose that assumption right here & now. You people  think  I am a tree hugging dink, forget about it. Temperatures in the American mid-west, let alone the average world temps, have risen. THAT isn't something I made up, FACT, one I have lived with for years.  Some of you Folks can&#8217;t have missed that it HAS gotten warmer, in general., unless you are conservative  and live in a bubble  in Idaho. I HAVE NO axe to grind here other make it clear some of us AMERICANS think that we should put  our survival ahead of  greed & profit of multinational corporations. That goes on  MANY different levels, not just this one. Please. Think of this in terms of "insurance". Perhaps, this is natural and unavoidable, perhaps not. ( You guys with that mention the solar influence? Good, that is ONE possibility . Just ONE possibility, though). If you buy insurance, you know, sometimes , regardless of the remote possibilities, sometime we have to guard against silly things like , floods, earthquakes, tornados. The possibility   that global climate changes are man made?  Don&#8217;t tell me that it isn&#8217;t possible nor  it is foolish  to take man made causes into account here . I think, given the variables, we should  try to do something to  alleviate  it just in case, it makes  pure ol&#8217; American common sense  to ME. Maybe some of you folks have vested interest in your stock portfolios or what some  some ding-a-ling  tells you what to think ? Just give me neg reps or ignore me, then.  Throw caution aside. Gamble with America&#8217;s and the worlds&#8217; future to save a few bucks. What can I do?


----------



## Meister (Sep 1, 2011)

SW2SILVER said:


> I am a frustrated  AMERICAN right now. I AM no freaking dumbass liberal, so loose that assumption right here & now. You people  think  I am a tree hugging dink, forget about it. Temperatures in the American mid-west, let alone the average world temps, have risen. THAT isn't something I made up, FACT, one I have lived with for years.  Some of you Folks can&#8217;t have missed that it HAS gotten warmer, in general., unless you are conservative  and live in a bubble  in Idaho. I HAVE NO axe to grind here other make it clear some of us AMERICANS think that we should put  our survival ahead of  greed & profit of multinational corporations. That goes on  MANY different levels, not just this one. Please. Think of this in terms of "insurance". Perhaps, this is natural and unavoidable, perhaps not. ( You guys with that mention the solar influence? Good, that is ONE possibility . Just ONE possibility, though). If you buy insurance, you know, sometimes , regardless of the remote possibilities, sometime we have to guard against silly things like , floods, earthquakes, tornados. The possibility   that global climate changes are man made?  Don&#8217;t tell me that it isn&#8217;t possible nor  it is foolish  to take man made causes into account here . I think, given the variables, we should  try to do something to  alleviate  it just in case, it makes  pure ol&#8217; American common sense  to ME. Maybe some of you folks have vested interest in your stock portfolios or what some  some ding-a-ling  tells you what to think ? Just give me neg reps or ignore me, then.  Throw caution aside. Gamble with America&#8217;s and the worlds&#8217; future to save a few bucks. What can I do?



So with all that you stated...what's your solution to bring down the temperature of the world....hmmmm?  I'm really curious what a non liberal has to say about this.


----------



## ScienceRocks (Sep 1, 2011)

SW2SILVER said:


> I am a frustrated  AMERICAN right now. I AM no freaking dumbass liberal, so loose that assumption right here & now. You people  think  I am a tree hugging dink, forget about it. Temperatures in the American mid-west, let alone the average world temps, have risen. THAT isn't something I made up, FACT, one I have lived with for years.  Some of you Folks can&#8217;t have missed that it HAS gotten warmer, in general., unless you are conservative  and live in a bubble  in Idaho. I HAVE NO axe to grind here other make it clear some of us AMERICANS think that we should put  our survival ahead of  greed & profit of multinational corporations. That goes on  MANY different levels, not just this one. Please. Think of this in terms of "insurance". Perhaps, this is natural and unavoidable, perhaps not. ( You guys with that mention the solar influence? Good, that is ONE possibility . Just ONE possibility, though). If you buy insurance, you know, sometimes , regardless of the remote possibilities, sometime we have to guard against silly things like , floods, earthquakes, tornados. The possibility   that global climate changes are man made?  Don&#8217;t tell me that it isn&#8217;t possible nor  it is foolish  to take man made causes into account here . I think, given the variables, we should  try to do something to  alleviate  it just in case, it makes  pure ol&#8217; American common sense  to ME. Maybe some of you folks have vested interest in your stock portfolios or what some  some ding-a-ling  tells you what to think ? Just give me neg reps or ignore me, then.  Throw caution aside. Gamble with America&#8217;s and the worlds&#8217; future to save a few bucks. What can I do?




My friend lets just say that I agree that it has
1# Been hot within the midwest for reasons that I stated in a post within this thread.
2# That the global temperatures have been warming the past 30-40 years. Not debatable.

The question is why it's warming as the tsi/solar output has been sloping slowly downwards since 1955. Of course gssack will note other factors, which are very possible.

You have to ask how accurate the temperature data is
-How much can you trust a temperature ob in 1940 within the congo or central Asia(Lao's, Thailand). Don't tell me very good.
-considering the US has a fairly loose standard its self of having these temperature stations near pavement, buildings, ect...We even have to question that.
+Sure we have satellite data for the past 30 years, which I believe is pretty good. So yes we have warmed.

=why is it warming? Some will SAY co2 is acting as a positive forcing on our climate, but others will point out that there is no way around the second law of thermodynamics...Fourier attempt to explain how it could work is being challenged. Some pretty serious physics are being debated. I say serious because even the experts are banging there heads on the table over it.

-now if you believe it is co2---> how accurate are the models in truly understanding the crappy understanding of the physics. Good luck. 
-we're figuring out that there is a lot more to this then first meets the eye. I'd expect in 20 years from now we will be wondering wtf we're talking today.

What do you suggest to stop it?


----------



## westwall (Sep 1, 2011)

SW2SILVER said:


> I am a frustrated  AMERICAN right now. I AM no freaking dumbass liberal, so loose that assumption right here & now. You people  think  I am a tree hugging dink, forget about it. Temperatures in the American mid-west, let alone the average world temps, have risen. THAT isn't something I made up, FACT, one I have lived with for years.  Some of you Folks can&#8217;t have missed that it HAS gotten warmer, in general., unless you are conservative  and live in a bubble  in Idaho. I HAVE NO axe to grind here other make it clear some of us AMERICANS think that we should put  our survival ahead of  greed & profit of multinational corporations. That goes on  MANY different levels, not just this one. Please. Think of this in terms of "insurance". Perhaps, this is natural and unavoidable, perhaps not. ( You guys with that mention the solar influence? Good, that is ONE possibility . Just ONE possibility, though). If you buy insurance, you know, sometimes , regardless of the remote possibilities, sometime we have to guard against silly things like , floods, earthquakes, tornados. The possibility   that global climate changes are man made?  Don&#8217;t tell me that it isn&#8217;t possible nor  it is foolish  to take man made causes into account here . I think, given the variables, we should  try to do something to  alleviate  it just in case, it makes  pure ol&#8217; American common sense  to ME. Maybe some of you folks have vested interest in your stock portfolios or what some  some ding-a-ling  tells you what to think ? Just give me neg reps or ignore me, then.  Throw caution aside. Gamble with America&#8217;s and the worlds&#8217; future to save a few bucks. What can I do?







Have you noticed that Ireland is having the coldest summer since 1851?  I have been here in my current location for 24 years now.  In that time I have seen the end of a cooling phase and the beginning middle and now ending of a warming phase. 

 From 1990 to 2006 we had to have the A/C on during the night for around 6 weeks of the summer.  From 2007 on that has been diminishing.  Last year we ran it for a week.  This year we havn't run the A/C at all.

Your entire life is quite literally shorter than the blink of an eye to the planet.  What you perceive is irrelevent.  It has no bearing on what is actually occuring.  If you have read anything about the warming issue you would have come across a certain fact that renders all the hype and CO2 pseudo science moot.  Those are the Vostock ice cores.  They show beyond doubt that warming occurs first then up to 800 years later CO2 levels increase.  Furhtermore, it has been shown that even with CO2 levels maintaining the high levels for a period of 1000 years there were two cycles of warming and cooling and the CO2 levels  changed very little thus proving beyond doubt that CO2 is not a driver of temperature it's levels in the atmosphere are a RESULT of warming.


----------



## SW2SILVER (Sep 1, 2011)

Matthew said:


> SW2SILVER said:
> 
> 
> > I am a frustrated  AMERICAN right now. I AM no freaking dumbass liberal, so loose that assumption right here & now. You people  think  I am a tree hugging dink, forget about it. Temperatures in the American mid-west, let alone the average world temps, have risen. THAT isn't something I made up, FACT, one I have lived with for years.  Some of you Folks can&#8217;t have missed that it HAS gotten warmer, in general., unless you are conservative  and live in a bubble  in Idaho. I HAVE NO axe to grind here other make it clear some of us AMERICANS think that we should put  our survival ahead of  greed & profit of multinational corporations. That goes on  MANY different levels, not just this one. Please. Think of this in terms of "insurance". Perhaps, this is natural and unavoidable, perhaps not. ( You guys with that mention the solar influence? Good, that is ONE possibility . Just ONE possibility, though). If you buy insurance, you know, sometimes , regardless of the remote possibilities, sometime we have to guard against silly things like , floods, earthquakes, tornados. The possibility   that global climate changes are man made?  Don&#8217;t tell me that it isn&#8217;t possible nor  it is foolish  to take man made causes into account here . I think, given the variables, we should  try to do something to  alleviate  it just in case, it makes  pure ol&#8217; American common sense  to ME. Maybe some of you folks have vested interest in your stock portfolios or what some  some ding-a-ling  tells you what to think ? Just give me neg reps or ignore me, then.  Throw caution aside. Gamble with America&#8217;s and the worlds&#8217; future to save a few bucks. What can I do?
> ...



Put a close pin on your nose: Reduce CO2 emissions. That is all I can reply.  I can&#8217;t do that ALL by myself, it might take a little help. I don't want to be a snarky jerk  like so many of our liberal friends. When Paul Revere said : "The British are coming!" Nobody asked him  what he was doing to stop them.  I think we Americans can put our heads together and at least TRY to find an answer . We are up to it, I think.


----------



## ScienceRocks (Sep 1, 2011)

SW2SILVER said:


> Matthew said:
> 
> 
> > SW2SILVER said:
> ...





Dude, I'm not putting a close pin on my nose, but I'd suggest if you went to stop the warming with two full prove two ways.

1# Build millions of sulfur planets(much bigger scale of what is occurring in china) and which will produce cloud nuclei, which will form clouds and reflect the solar energy back to space instead of it making it to the surface. 

2# Send a few high yield nukes into a weakness within a super volcano in blow the bastard. Will cool the planet. A vei 8 like Yellowstone would do it. Its possible as you will be kicking in a weakness, which will cause a chain reaction and the whole thing will collapse. Believe me when dealing with a structure such as a super volcano it is all about shape and how it handles the pressure. It kick out a focal point it is possible. Also in the fact that we have 6,000 plus nukes to throw down it until it was forced to give is another point.

If you went something to cool the planet there is your answer.


----------



## OohPooPahDoo (Sep 2, 2011)

westwall said:


> OohPooPahDoo said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...





Sorry, its a 66 page long thread, and you're the one making claims about those "studies". If you can't identify the studies you supposedly read as easily as you can make sarcastic replies, then, like I said, its pretty obvious you're not really familiar with them.


 I had asked you what specifically was wrong with the studies, and you can't say one thing about it. Why the fuck are you wasting people's times? Don't claim to be familiar with shit you haven't even read.


----------



## westwall (Sep 2, 2011)

OohPooPahDoo said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > OohPooPahDoo said:
> ...






I suggest you go back and look at my quote, you know the one you used, the page just beofre that one has all you need.  In other words you clowns come in and try and make us waste our time appeasing you.  Ain't going to happen anymore.  I've addressed you and your clones and described the problems with the studies on numerous occasions, in other words do your own work now. 

 Your side has made the claim that the weather we are seeing is somehow different from the weather from before....so prove it.


----------



## OohPooPahDoo (Sep 2, 2011)

westwall said:


> OohPooPahDoo said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...



I've quoted you many times. Can you please, on purpose, be even more vague?



> In other words you clowns come in and try and make us waste our time appeasing you.  Ain't going to happen anymore.  I've addressed you and your clones and described the problems with the studies on numerous occasions, in other words do your own work now.



Right. The "studies" without names or anything in them that you can remember.




> Your side has made the claim that the weather we are seeing is somehow different from the weather from before....so prove it.



I've made no such claim.


----------



## signelect (Sep 2, 2011)

Its so hot here in Houston. The tempatures seem like they are getting hotter and hotter. We had an all tiem record last week of 106 degrees. It was the hotteset day to ever be recorded in Houston. I remember when i was 8 i used to play outside like go to the park with my friends, bike riding, play hide and seek basicall any outside game. That was almost 18 years ago. Now my daughter is 8 and the heat outside is so unbearable it hard staying outside for too long. Not only is it hot and muggy but the grass is dry and rough. Nobody likes to run and play in th grass anymore because its soo dry. I loved the way grass felt beneath my toes now i feel like im walking on branches.


The heat is horrible. Hopefully we'll get some rain soon. Some was predicted by tonight but im not to sure.


----------



## ScienceRocks (Sep 2, 2011)

signelect said:


> Its so hot here in Houston. The tempatures seem like they are getting hotter and hotter. We had an all tiem record last week of 106 degrees. It was the hotteset day to ever be recorded in Houston. I remember when i was 8 i used to play outside like go to the park with my friends, bike riding, play hide and seek basicall any outside game. That was almost 18 years ago. Now my daughter is 8 and the heat outside is so unbearable it hard staying outside for too long. Not only is it hot and muggy but the grass is dry and rough. Nobody likes to run and play in th grass anymore because its soo dry. I loved the way grass felt beneath my toes now i feel like im walking on branches.
> 
> 
> The heat is horrible. Hopefully we'll get some rain soon. Some was predicted by tonight but im not to sure.



The heat is because of a set up(Meteorological) that has happened before and will happen again. Global warming would increase the likely hood of such warm set up within a faster occurring time span, but wouldn't make the set up in the first place. Also .4c of warming if you can trust the temperature network of the globe wouldn't=this kind of a climate change outside of the extreme events. 

Imagine the earth for a moment in 1950 was .4c cooler globally, while today it is warmer, which means that either the area's of above normal for a time period(1950-1990) are warmer in intensity then the cold area's or they have grown within there scale over the cold area's. Climate is about what your avg is and how that changes within your area or nationally, or even globally has to do with what it avg's out to be. Climate=avg of the weather over a time scale for a area or a "planet" such as global warming. It is called global warming as it has to do with the global avg temperature.

The west coast is cooler then avg, but your area is warmer....What is more intense and larger within its scale? IF the warmer then avg is larger or more intense=the USA is going to be warmer then normal. Take this globally.

Of course we're assuming right off the BAT that the earth is NOW .4c warming then 1980. The USA had its warmest year ever in 1934, but cooled back to the 1920's by 1950-1970s and has just warmed back to the early 1930's. I'm sure you were not born in the 1930's?


----------



## Chris (Sep 2, 2011)

Record Events for Fri Aug 26, 2011 through Thu Sep 1, 2011 

High Temperatures: 1533 
Low Temperatures: 31 
Lowest Max Temperatures: 61 
Highest Min Temperatures: 1272 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## Old Rocks (Sep 2, 2011)

westwall said:


> And while it's been warm here in the central US (but cold here in northern Nevada and seemingly the entire west coast) it has been a very chilly winter in Ireland.  It appears to be the coldest since 1851.....
> 
> 
> 
> ...



UAH Global Temperature Update for August, 2011: +0.33 deg. C « Roy Spencer, Ph. D. 

Poor, poor Walleyes, cannot post real science.

AGU: Case for global warming more certain than ever | SciGuy | a Chron.com blog

AGU: Case for global warming more certain than ever
The American Geophysical Union, an organization of nearly 50,000 geophysicists and students, updated its position statement on global warming today. The new statement is stronger than the original statement, released in 2003.

Heres the opening to the original statement, which allows some uncertainty:

Human activities are increasingly altering the Earths climate. These effects add to natural influences that have been present over Earths history.

And heres the opening of the revised statement:

The Earths climate is now clearly out of balance and is warming.

The revised statement also closes with a fairly strong call-to-action for its members, beyond just doing the science:

Members of the AGU, as part of the scientific community, collectively have special responsibilities: to pursue research needed to understand it; to educate the public on the causes, risks, and hazards; and to communicate clearly and objectively with those who can implement policies to shape future climate.

So there you have it. Despite what you may have read elsewhere about an eroding consensus, the worlds largest organization of Earth scientists believes the scientific case for human-caused global warming is getting stronger, not weaker.

That doesnt mean theyre right, of course, but it is what it is.


----------



## Meister (Sep 2, 2011)

Old Rocks said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > And while it's been warm here in the central US (but cold here in northern Nevada and seemingly the entire west coast) it has been a very chilly winter in Ireland.  It appears to be the coldest since 1851.....
> ...



Poor ol' rockhead can't figure out when he's been duped.


----------



## westwall (Sep 2, 2011)

Meister said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...


----------



## skookerasbil (Sep 3, 2011)

This thread has become about as compelling as group navel contemplation.................









The k00ks who promote all these numbers/data/facts.........really think it is serving some kind of purpose ( presumably). The dopey author of this thread has been posting up this same information every day for years now.......and then there are the other like-followers who get all giddy just the same every single day..........for years.

My question is...............for what purpose?

If we are to assume that it is for the purpose of raising awareness about temperatures to create a groundswell of hyper-activism to drastically change public policy to drop all priorities to fight "man-made" global warming.................guess what................


I digress to photo above





By the way Chris.........whatcha think of my Sean Connery Photoshop?? Shits gonna be following your temp posts for a long, long time s0n!!! Just on principle alone...........


----------



## westwall (Sep 3, 2011)

skookerasbil said:


> This thread has become about as compelling as group navel contemplation.................
> 
> 
> 
> ...







Yep, their arguments are so compelling (NOT) that even Obama has decided to shelve the ozone nonsense.  






"President Barack Obama has asked EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson to withdraw the agencys proposed toughened ozone standards, citing the importance of reducing regulatory burdens and regulatory uncertainty, particularly as our economy continues to recover. The Presidents statement and EPAs are below.

These are rules that would provide no health benefits but cost $1 trillion per year in compliance and kill 7.4 million jobs by 2020.

So this is a hugely important victory for American workers and the economy, as well as those of us who have been fighting the EPAs proposed ozone standards.

In a separate statement, EPA administrator Lisa Jackson says the agency will revisit the ozone standard. But that wont occur until at least 2013  when, with any luck, she will be able to revisit it from an unemployment line. 

President Obamas statement:


The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

For Immediate Release September 02, 2011
 Statement by the President on the Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards

Over the last two and half years, my administration, under the leadership of EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson, has taken some of the strongest actions since the enactment of the Clean Air Act four decades ago to protect our environment and the health of our families from air pollution. From reducing mercury and other toxic air pollution from outdated power plants to doubling the fuel efficiency of our cars and trucks, the historic steps weve taken will save tens of thousands of lives each year, remove over a billion tons of pollution from our air, and produce hundreds of billions of dollars in benefits for the American people.

At the same time, I have continued to underscore the importance of reducing regulatory burdens and regulatory uncertainty, particularly as our economy continues to recover. With that in mind, and after careful consideration, I have requested that Administrator Jackson withdraw the draft Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards at this time. Work is already underway to update a 2006 review of the science that will result in the reconsideration of the ozone standard in 2013. Ultimately, I did not support asking state and local governments to begin implementing a new standard that will soon be reconsidered.

I want to be clear: my commitment and the commitment of my administration to protecting public health and the environment is unwavering. I will continue to stand with the hardworking men and women at the EPA as they strive every day to hold polluters accountable and protect our families from harmful pollution. And my administration will continue to vigorously oppose efforts to weaken EPAs authority under the Clean Air Act or dismantle the progress we have made.

EPA Administrator Lisa Jacksons statement:


Statement by EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson on the Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards 

Since day one, under President Obamas leadership, EPA has worked to ensure health protections for the American people, and has made tremendous progress to ensure that Clean Air Act standards protect all Americans by reducing our exposures to harmful air pollution like mercury, arsenic and carbon dioxide. This Administration has put in place some of the most important standards and safeguards for clean air in U.S. history: the most significant reduction of sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide air pollution across state borders; a long-overdue proposal to finally cut mercury pollution from power plants; and the first-ever carbon pollution standards for cars and trucks. We will revisit the ozone standard, in compliance with the Clean Air Act."


----------



## Old Rocks (Sep 3, 2011)

Meister said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...



I see. All the scientific societies in the world are set on duping me. Right. And all the National Academies of Science. And all the major Universities. 

Got your little tinfoil hat on again, I see.


----------



## Meister (Sep 3, 2011)

Old Rocks said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> > Old Rocks said:
> ...



Yeah...you've been duped.  Your too stupid to follow the money, rockhead.


----------



## Old Rocks (Sep 3, 2011)

Meister, you are just plain stupid. The scientists are from differant countries with differant political systems and ideologies. Yet they all agree, AGW is real and a threat. 

The leading Scientific Society of Physicists unequivecolly endorses the statement from the AGU. And posts on their site the scientific history of the research into GHGs and how they work, and their effect on the atmosphere and environment. 

The Carbon Dioxide Greenhouse Effect

That is the American Institute of Physics site.

Of course, you have an obese junkie on the radio for your source of science, so how can you possibly be wrong?


----------



## gslack (Sep 3, 2011)

Old Rocks said:


> Meister, you are just plain stupid. The scientists are from differant countries with differant political systems and ideologies. Yet they all agree, AGW is real and a threat.
> 
> The leading Scientific Society of Physicists unequivecolly endorses the statement from the AGU. And posts on their site the scientific history of the research into GHGs and how they work, and their effect on the atmosphere and environment.
> 
> ...



THEY DO NOT ALL AGREE!!!

The IPCC says they do, greenpeace says they do, and the UEA feeds the BS. The reality is they do not all agree. In the IPCC reports alone there is a vast disparity in what scientists say as opposed to what the IPCC claims they say. This has been attested to many times by the very scientists they employ. They tell them one thing and they (IPCC) turn into something else. its let go because they are a governmental body and its funding for them.


----------



## Old Rocks (Sep 4, 2011)

OK, G-string, enlighten us. Which Scientific Society states that AGW is not a fact? Which National Academy of Science?


----------



## Chris (Sep 4, 2011)

Record Events for Sun Aug 28, 2011 through Sat Sep 3, 2011 

High Temperatures: 1423 
Low Temperatures: 46 
Lowest Max Temperatures: 65 
Highest Min Temperatures: 1313 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## gslack (Sep 4, 2011)

Old Rocks said:


> OK, G-string, enlighten us. Which Scientific Society states that AGW is not a fact? Which National Academy of Science?



Don't need to douchebag, you won't accept anything BUT those on your side anyway. I will not play this ignorant BS game you try to pull out of your ass everytime you get in a corner.


You only accept certain science from certain sources we know this and so do you....


----------



## Old Rocks (Sep 4, 2011)

LOL. As in 'I can't find any science, and don't understand that crap anyway'. LOL


----------



## westwall (Sep 4, 2011)

Old Rocks said:


> LOL. As in 'I can't find any science, and don't understand that crap anyway'. LOL








No, it's as in you're a myopic troll and no amount of reasonable discussion will interact with the minimal brain cells you enjoy.  Thus it is no longer worth wasting our time with your horse manure.  We have pointed out many times that the various bodies you claim to show universal support for the dogma of AGW are in fact the leadership and NOT THE BODY OF THE MEMBERSHIP of those various organisations.  

So feel free to play stupid (well in your case you really are) but we will no longer waste our time with you or your host of clones and sock puppets.  Even Obama has decided that the new EPA regs were useless and would siginficantly harm this country's (thereby destroying his chances for reelection) economy, so he has halted the new regs.

Your side loses yet again.  I see a whole series of epic failures since CLIMATEGATE hit the news.  Seems like the rest of the scientific community does understand the perfidy and underhandedness of your religous cult, and they are abandoning you like the turd in the pool that your group is.


----------



## Trakar (Sep 4, 2011)

westwall said:


> ...We have pointed out many times that the various bodies you claim to show universal support for the dogma of AGW are in fact the leadership and NOT THE BODY OF THE MEMBERSHIP of those various organisations...



Please provide support for the implication that the "BODY OF THE MEMBERSHIP" of any national or international scientific organization or group substantively disagrees with the mainstream scientific principles and understandings associated with anthropogenically forced climate change.


----------



## gslack (Sep 4, 2011)

Old Rocks said:


> LOL. As in 'I can't find any science, and don't understand that crap anyway'. LOL



Translation = Oldsocks used his crutch he falls back on in every AGW argument now.

LOL, it doesn't matter the groups he cites are the ones perpetuating the nonsense, or the illogical contention that all others are not to be trusted, he believes it saves his ass...


----------



## Old Rocks (Sep 4, 2011)

westwall said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> > LOL. As in 'I can't find any science, and don't understand that crap anyway'. LOL
> ...



*So funny, Walleyes. Why yes, there has been one Scientific Society in which the members forced the leadership to rescind it's statements on Global Warming.*

American Association of Petroleum Geologists - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Global warming controversyIn 2006 the AAPG was criticized for selecting Michael Crichton for their Journalism Award "for his recent science-based thriller State of Fear", in which Crichton exposed his skeptical view of global warming, and for Jurassic Park.[2] Daniel P. Schrag, a geochemist who directs the Harvard University Center for the Environment, called the award "a total embarrassment" that he said "reflects the politics of the oil industry and a lack of professionalism" on the association's part.[3] The award has since been renamed the "Geosciences in the Media" Award.[4]

The criticism drew attention to the AAPG's 1999 position statement[5] formally rejecting the likelihood of human influence on recent climate. The Council of the American Quaternary Association wrote in a criticism of the award that the "AAPG stands alone among scientific societies in its denial of human-induced effects on global warming."[6]

As recently as March 2007, articles in the newsletter of the AAPG Division of Professional Affairs stated that "the data does not support human activity as the cause of global warming"[7] and characterize the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change reports as "wildly distorted and politicized."[8]

[edit] 2007 AAPG revised positionAcknowledging that the association's previous policy statement on Climate Change was "not supported by a significant number of our members and prospective members",[9] AAPG's formal stance was reviewed and changed in July 2007.
The new statement formally accepts human activity as at least one contributor to carbon dioxide increase, but does not confirm its link to climate change, saying its members are "divided on the degree of influence that anthropogenic CO2 has" on climate. AAPG also stated support for "research to narrow probabilistic ranges on the effect of anthropogenic CO2 on global climate."[10]

AAPG also withdrew its earlier criticism of other scientific organizations and research stating, "Certain climate simulation models predict that the warming trend will continue, as reported through NAS, AGU, AAAS, and AMS. AAPG respects these scientific opinions but wants to add that the current climate warming projections could fall within well-documented natural variations in past climate and observed temperature data. These data do not necessarily support the maximum case scenarios forecast in some models."


----------



## FactFinder (Sep 4, 2011)

Chris said:


> Record Events for Mon Mar 14, 2011 through Sun Mar 20, 2011
> 
> High Temperatures: 537
> Low Temperatures: 11
> ...



Where the F are they? Not in New England. Oh yeah we have selective global warming. Excusse me, I forgot!


----------



## elvis (Sep 4, 2011)

Old Rocks said:


> Meister, *you are just plain stupid*. The scientists are from* differant* countries with *differant* political systems and ideologies. Yet they all agree, AGW is real and a threat.
> 
> The leading Scientific Society of Physicists *unequivecolly* endorses the statement from the AGU. And posts on their site the scientific history of the research into GHGs and how they work, and their effect on the atmosphere and environment.
> 
> ...


----------



## Meister (Sep 4, 2011)

elvis said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> > Meister, *you are just plain stupid*. The scientists are from* differant* countries with *differant* political systems and ideologies. Yet they all agree, AGW is real and a threat.
> ...



I just couldn't bring myself to respond to the Algorian Cultist.


----------



## saveliberty (Sep 4, 2011)

Suppose to be really cold for this time of year here next week.  New Zealand just sent a penguin off to Antarticia.  Why would they do that with all the ice melted?  Seems kind of rude to make him swim all that way.


----------



## ScienceRocks (Sep 4, 2011)

Question for Old rocks

Can you tell me how the co2 molecule transmits energy from a cooler atmosphere to a warmer surface? I understand that within Meteorology that the temperature with height increases throughout the Troposphere, and the warmest air(densest) is near the surface that warms the atmosphere above...That is why the temperature decreases with height. Yes, I understand Latent heat and how how it phase charges and releases heat into the environment, but that doesn't explain how that energy makes it back to a warmer surface from a cold atmosphere.

I understand that Fourier tried to explain that the second law is all about net energy transfer, but the discussion at skeptical science on this topic in how they couldn't put it to sleep is one of interest to me. It brings some doubt into my mind. I need more information on this and it works. 

Can you give me some stuff that shows how this can work. Like more of fouriers idea's of heat transfer and how it can work besides being a net flow of heat? 

Thank you old rocks.


----------



## westwall (Sep 4, 2011)

Trakar said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > ...We have pointed out many times that the various bodies you claim to show universal support for the dogma of AGW are in fact the leadership and NOT THE BODY OF THE MEMBERSHIP of those various organisations...
> ...







Allready done in many previous posts.  Learn how to use the search engine.


----------



## ScienceRocks (Sep 5, 2011)

Question for Old rocks

Can you tell me how the co2 molecule transmits energy from a cooler atmosphere to a warmer surface? I understand that within Meteorology that the temperature with height increases throughout the Troposphere, and the warmest air(densest) is near the surface that warms the atmosphere above...That is why the temperature decreases with height. Yes, I understand Latent heat and how how it phase charges and releases heat into the environment, but that doesn't explain how that energy makes it back to a warmer surface from a cold atmosphere.

I understand that Fourier tried to explain that the second law is all about net energy transfer, but the discussion at skeptical science on this topic in how they couldn't put it to sleep is one of interest to me. It brings some doubt into my mind. I need more information on this and it works. 

Can you give me some stuff that shows how this can work. Like more of fouriers idea's of heat transfer and how it can work besides being a net flow of heat? 

Thank you old rocks.


----------



## Old Rocks (Sep 5, 2011)

Matthew said:


> Question for Old rocks
> 
> Can you tell me how the co2 molecule transmits energy from a cooler atmosphere to a warmer surface? I understand that within Meteorology that the temperature with height increases throughout the Troposphere, and the warmest air(densest) is near the surface that warms the atmosphere above...That is why the temperature decreases with height. Yes, I understand Latent heat and how how it phase charges and releases heat into the environment, but that doesn't explain how that energy makes it back to a warmer surface from a cold atmosphere.
> 
> ...



Biology 750: Fluorescence


----------



## Old Rocks (Sep 5, 2011)

westwall said:


> Trakar said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...



Like hell. I provided an explicit example of the membership of the Association of Petroleum Geologists forcing the the leadership to acknowledge the reality of GHGs and global warming. You have provided nothing but yap-yap. Another lie to cover the fact that there are no examples.


----------



## skookerasbil (Sep 5, 2011)

The EIA study shows that these critics have fingered the wrong energies. Researchers report that* last year, oil, natural gas, and coal received a total of 11 percent of all federal energy subsidies. *And most of those oil and natural gas subsidies are typical deductions, deferrals, and credits that all businesses take.

In fact, as a share of net income, the *oil and gas industry paid 41.1 percent in federal income taxes last year,* compared to 26.5 percent for all non-oil and gas S&P 500 manufacturing companies. Meanwhile, *oil and gas account for 78 percent of domestic energy production* and are responsible for more than 9.2 million American jobs.

Where Federal Energy Subsidies Really Go - Forbes


----------



## Chris (Sep 5, 2011)

Record Events for Mon Aug 29, 2011 through Sun Sep 4, 2011 

High Temperatures: 1293 
Low Temperatures: 52 
Lowest Max Temperatures: 73 
Highest Min Temperatures: 1206 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## daveman (Sep 5, 2011)

It's funny how Chris is still desperately claiming that weather is climate.


----------



## Trakar (Sep 5, 2011)

westwall said:


> Trakar said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...



I see nothing in any of these, even the singlet tantrum among the fringe petroleum geologists fraternity that supports your assertion or addresses my question:

DPA Climate Change


> ...Issue:
> In the last century, growth in human population has increased energy use. This has contributed additional carbon dioxide (CO2) and other gases to the atmosphere. Although the AAPG membership is divided on the degree of influence that anthropogenic CO2 has on recent and potential global temperature increases, AAPG believes that expansion of scientific climate research into the basic controls on climate is important.
> 
> ...Certain climate simulation models predict that the warming trend will continue, as reported through National Academy of Sciences, American Geophysical Union, American Academy for the Advancement of Science, and American Meteorological Society. AAPG respects these scientific opinions but wants to add that the current climate warming projections could fall within well-documented natural variations in past climate and observed temperature data. These data do not necessarily support the maximum-case scenarios forecast in some models.
> ...



Despite all the conditionals and quibbling, I see nothing in the above that "provides support for the implication that the "BODY OF THE MEMBERSHIP" of any national or international scientific organization or group substantively disagrees with the mainstream scientific principles and understandings associated with anthropogenically forced climate change."

Please provide support for your assertion that this has happened anywhere in any legitimate national or international scientific organization.


----------



## Trakar (Sep 5, 2011)

gslack said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> > Meister, you are just plain stupid. The scientists are from differant countries with differant political systems and ideologies. Yet they all agree, AGW is real and a threat.
> ...



Please provide, verifiable reliable reference (no whackadoodle fringe political blogs) supporting this assertion.


----------



## Chris (Sep 6, 2011)

Record Events for Tue Aug 30, 2011 through Mon Sep 5, 2011 

High Temperatures: 1025 
Low Temperatures: 53 
Lowest Max Temperatures: 74 
Highest Min Temperatures: 1032 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## skookerasbil (Sep 6, 2011)

Chris said:


> Record Events for Tue Aug 30, 2011 through Mon Sep 5, 2011
> 
> High Temperatures: 1025
> Low Temperatures: 53
> ...


----------



## Old Rocks (Sep 6, 2011)

There are a lot of people in Texas caring right now.


----------



## Meister (Sep 6, 2011)

Old Rocks said:


> There are a lot of people in Texas caring right now.



Most people in Tx are still smarter than you ol' rockhead. They aren't blaming AGW


----------



## Old Rocks (Sep 6, 2011)

LOL. No, AGW is not to blame for the extreme heat and drought in Texas, it has happened before. AGW is not to blame for the spring and summer long flooding on the Missouri and Mississippi, it has happened before, or at least it has flooded before. AGW is not to blame for the extreme outbreak of tornados in the Midwest and South, it has happened before. AGW is not to blame for the Northeast floods prior to Irene, it has happened before. The Arctic Ice is at 3 million square miles for the fourth year, oops, that has not happened in recorded history before. 

All this in just one year. But AGW cannot possibly have anything to do with it. That would not be as 'the way things oughter be'.


----------



## gslack (Sep 6, 2011)

Old Rocks said:


> LOL. No, AGW is not to blame for the extreme heat and drought in Texas, it has happened before. AGW is not to blame for the spring and summer long flooding on the Missouri and Mississippi, it has happened before, or at least it has flooded before. AGW is not to blame for the extreme outbreak of tornados in the Midwest and South, it has happened before. AGW is not to blame for the Northeast floods prior to Irene, it has happened before. The Arctic Ice is at 3 million square miles for the fourth year, oops, that has not happened in recorded history before.
> 
> All this in just one year. But AGW cannot possibly have anything to do with it. That would not be as 'the way things oughter be'.



Yes, yes greenpeace says this and al gore says that, la la la.... Windpower that what we need, right socks?


----------



## Old Rocks (Sep 6, 2011)

Still just nonsense yap-yap from the same old brainless source.


----------



## westwall (Sep 6, 2011)

Old Rocks said:


> Still just nonsense yap-yap from the same old brainless source.







Yes, you are quite proficient at useless yap yap.  Did you have to go to school for that or were you just born "special"?


----------



## Old Rocks (Sep 6, 2011)

Where is the cooling you predicted, Walleyes? Did you send it to Texas? Arctic Ice very near it's 2007 low. Thought you said it was getting thicker and greater in area.


----------



## westwall (Sep 8, 2011)

Old Rocks said:


> Where is the cooling you predicted, Walleyes? Did you send it to Texas? Arctic Ice very near it's 2007 low. Thought you said it was getting thicker and greater in area.







Other than "corrected" data it is cooler.  Ireland hasn't had a cold summer like this since 1851.  We have been cool.  The midwest has been hot (southern Texas especially so) but most of the rest of the world has been cooler.  As far as the Arctic ice goes, we havn't tied 2007 last time I looked and the thick ice is larger in extent then it has been for years.  Remember olfraud, the Earth takes time to do things.  She operates on her time scale not your pipsqueek one, so in a couple more years (which is what I predicted the first time) I predict Arctic ice coverage will be greatly increased.


----------



## Old Rocks (Sep 8, 2011)

Really? Colder? That is not what Spencer shows. And the people at PIOMAS show a new record for volume loss already.

Arctic Sea Ice: PIOMAS


----------



## skookerasbil (Sep 9, 2011)

Imagine scientists of centuries ago hearing of selective manipulation of data and rejection of potential variables or new information.

The 'science" of today is more like social science.

gay


----------



## ScienceRocks (Sep 14, 2011)

The enso for 3.4
The past few weeks we have been between -.6 to -.8c within 3.4. 




A model of the rest of the year shows that we will go below -1.2 to -1.8c with a means near -1.5 or strong nina. Compared to what 2008 had...I think the debate is over on what year had a colder enso...

Looking at these models some of them are trending towards -2c within 3.4. That would be the strongest nina since 1974.

2008 
Sept -.20c 
Oct -.26c 
Nov -.22c
Dec -.73c

2008 surely did attept to go down at the last minute, but compared to 2011 already being in its second nina with -.6c or colder temps in Sept kicks its ass.


----------



## ScienceRocks (Sep 14, 2011)

Whats to understand is that 2002-2006 was a period of positive neutral to weak-moderate nino; mostly -.4 to +1.2. It was a period of warm ENSO. 2007-2011 IS A PERIOD OF THE OPPOSITE. 2007 to 2011 has been either cold neutral or super nina 75 percent of the time. Only late 2009(Sept, oct) into the first half of 2010 had a nino event until April. 

1999-2001 was another such cold event...
1997-1998 was a warm event
1995-1997 was a cold effect
1990-1994 was a very warm enso

If we go into a strong nina before the end of this year and we manage to get into the top 10. 2008 Temperatures can't be matched again. Not even with -2.0c within 3.4 for half a fucking year...At least I don't believe so. I'm ready to say that no year within the next 4 years will be colder then the top 12 that goes back only to 2002. Forget 1999-2001 or even 2008. It would take a unbelievable 1974-1976 event based on what the baseline of this year is. My "model" prediction, I posted here last fall only supported .51c for a avg for this year on a equal 2008 match up...This fucker is dropping way below 2008 within the enso and still is showing to be on line to finish near .53-.54c for the year. Maybe just maybe things are starting to warm once again. It is now above my prediction is all I'm saying...Maybe the increase in solar energy the past 6 month is having some effect?

About 1/3rd of the warming 1992-1998 was rebounding out of the vei 6 volcano
About 1/2rd of the stabilization within temperature on the graph is the "cold period" between 1999-2001 that kepted temperatures from even coming close to 1998 within that period...Follow by a warm period that never had anything anywhere near 1998 from 2002-2006. 

Now we're within a period where everything is COLD. Internal forcing IS COLD, COLD, COLD. External forcing from the SUN Is a negative forcing since 2005. 

Imagine the period of warming of the 1980s into 1991...The rebound of the vei 6 is what made the 1990's appear to warm as fast as they did...Truth is they didn't warm more then .09 to .12c or near the 1980s...2000's have warmed .13c-.14c, but a warmer middle decade follow by a very cold end made it look less impressive. Lets wait until the next nino by 2016-2018 and you will see.

Doesn't matter what is pulling it upwards, but it just is!


----------



## ScienceRocks (Sep 15, 2011)

I have come to the conclusion that the "best" method would likely be a mix of Giss and UAh.
1# Giss covers the whole globe
2# UAH could be used to fill in the area's that are not covered very good; antarctic, arctic, africa, ect. 
3# The giss temperatures could be checked against the UAH at any location on the globe. 
4# Most importantly the giss "ocean" estimates could also be backed by the UAh data. 

What this would do is strengthening the giss data set greatly. 

Rss doesn't cover most of Antarctica, 
Noaa also doesn't or much of the arctic
Not totally complete. With the uah backing the giss estimates over those area's could be greatly increased in there accuracy. 

A mixture of giss and backed by the uah we would be a data set to be respected.

It would be nice if the Uah could find away to accurately handle the enso a little better, but nothing is perfect. Hell we could also use the new network of ocean buoy's that are being layed out to strengthen the bastard even more.

What do you think?


----------



## ScienceRocks (Sep 16, 2011)

Figure 1 -Revised estimate of global ocean heat content (10-1500 mtrs deep) for 2005-2010 derived from Argo measurements. The 6-yr trend accounts for 0.55±0.10Wm&#8722;2. Error bars and trend uncertainties exclude errors induced by remaining systematic errors in the global observing system. See Von Schuckmann & Le Traon (2011)

Argo I believe can't really be used before 2003-2004 time span.


----------



## ScienceRocks (Sep 18, 2011)

I just looked through the giss data...What I found is for 2011 we're now 43, 51, 57 for 3/4th of this year...Well the best year to compare this year to is *2008. *As I talked about above this year within the enso 3.4 is COLDER by -.3c to -.5c at this time...Models forecast by later this fall to get down to -1.2 to -1.5 range. Nearly double 2008 in dec....So YES 2008 .55 for the combined SEPT/OCT/NOV period should be the very highest this year could be IF we didn't warm since 2008. *BUT, if My model is right we should of warmed .06c since for the year! *

43+51+57+55/4=.515c for this year if the fall is rated the same as 2008...No reason within all that it will be this warm within this enso, but we sure as hell have broken all the rules for a non-warming over 2008 this year. 

.515-.44=.075c difference...On the high side with my prediction of .06c from 2008-2010. 

For double the effects of negative enso on the second half of this year then 2008...You could knock another .05c to make it more inline for Sept, Oct, Nov 2007, which was the honest start of the 2007-2008 super nina. 

So 43+51+57+50/4=50.25c for the year assuming we go into a solid nina for the end of the year like 2007...BUT 2007 never started out with the warmth of a 2006 nino either. So you'ed expect maybe even colder for this year. But anyways this brings things even closer to my models thinking of .0625 of warming since 2008. 

I wouldn't forecast colder then .48 for S/O/N period; which would still be supportive of my models thinking. Just our luck we turn out to be .52-.54c for this period...Which would be way above my modeled thinking.

The last s/o/n period that was colder then 2007 was 2000, which had .25c for the period...Add that sucker in there in you would get this year tied with 2008 at .44c. Its NOT POSSIBLE. There is no nina that could form that could force the tropics to cool enough to over take the rest warming that has happen since.

http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata/GLB.Ts+dSST.txt

What is .5025c as a yearly temperature within the giss record? Well, it would make this year the 9th warmest year since 1880.

What else is fun to think about is 2010 with a sept/oct/nov value as 2005 had(no nina)
2010, 68   75   53   63
2005,  59   62   57   68

Imagine if 2010 ended with a neutral pattern of .68 for S, O, N with .57 for June, july, August...

Well you get .67c for the year...I'd say a neutral year like 2005 that happen now would be near .65c +-.03c (So .62-.68c). 

OF course to understand the difference between 2005 and 2010 is to consider solar forcing and aerosals slowing the rate of warming...between 1992-2005 it might of been warming as .17-.2c per decade or .017-.02c per year, but since 2008 at least it has been warming near .015/year. Uah suggest closer to .013/year. 

A 1998 would be in the .7c today that only drifts into -neutral condition the 3-4 months.


----------



## Trakar (Sep 19, 2011)

Globe had eighth warmest August on record



> ...Global Temperature Highlights: June  August
> 
> The combined global land and ocean average surface temperature for June  August 2011 was the seventh warmest on record at 61.11 F (16.16 C), which is 1.01 F (0.56 C) above the 20th century average of 60.1 F (15.6 C). The margin of error associated with this temperature is +/- 0.16 F (0.09 C).
> 
> ...



mostly just weather, but it is consistent with the currently warming climate trend.


----------



## westwall (Sep 19, 2011)

Trakar said:


> Globe had eighth warmest August on record
> 
> 
> 
> ...







Yeah, sure it is....Funny how you guys come up with all these cute numbers and yet the cold keeps killing critters and people all over the globe......  

"Butterfly numbers have fallen after the coldest summer in two decades, a survey shows.
In particular, nearly two thirds of the common blue species were wiped out.
Numbers of all butterflies were down 11 per cent on last year as winds and heavy rain devastated their reproductive patterns.
The figures come from more than 34,000 people who joined the Big Butterfly Count, organised by the Butterfly Conservation charity."


Read more: Coldest summer in 20 years wipes out two-thirds of the common blue butterfly | Mail Online

http://www.stltoday.com/news/national/article_2b4e72d4-e93c-57ec-baf7-dc50a99cb9c2.html


----------



## ScienceRocks (Sep 19, 2011)

Trakar said:


> Globe had eighth warmest August on record
> 
> 
> 
> ...





Considering the noaa excludes *80 *percent of Antarctica and *20 *percent of the arctic...I believe it's on the cool side in its monthly and yearly estimations. My reasoning is both UAH and GISS came in at 3rd and 4th with UAH having 80 percent of Antarctica, 90 percent of the arctic within its view and it agreed with the GISS that has nearly 100 percent of both to a "T". In fact the UAH was .33c for August to GISS .3c when you place it on a 1979-2010 baseline to match UAH. 

The noaa constantly the past few years has missed a great deal of the warmth; since 2008 at least. I also say this as the satellite temp, buoys, station measurements map produced by the noaa supports the giss, uah too for Antarctica with at least 6c+ above normal over much of the continent...In fact everything when it was more lined up with last month appears to support giss and uah temperature patterns and of course the part it caught the noaa, but the noaa doesn't have much of Antarctica or arctic. Noaa is the half way point between hadley center and Giss and UAH in my opinion. 

A post I made earlier in this thread stated my opinion that the giss should be used with the UAH...As the uah can bring some support to its smoothing method over large area's. 

http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/psd/map/images/rnl/sfctmpmer_30b.rnl.gif


----------



## ScienceRocks (Sep 19, 2011)

westwall said:


> Trakar said:
> 
> 
> > Globe had eighth warmest August on record
> ...




http://www.usmessageboard.com/envir...mean-by-the-warmer-then-avg-being-larger.html


----------



## ScienceRocks (Sep 19, 2011)

Here is hadcruts 1850 global temperatures

1850/01 -0.691 -0.611 -0.772 -0.347 -1.036 -0.632 -0.743 -0.338 -1.045 -0.333 -1.049
1850/02 -0.357 -0.277 -0.437 -0.029 -0.685 -0.296 -0.410 -0.019 -0.695 -0.014 -0.699
1850/03 *-0.816* -0.729 -0.903 -0.534 -1.097 -0.752 -0.868 -0.521 -1.111 -0.514 -1.115
1850/04 -0.586 -0.505 -0.668 -0.340 -0.833 -0.524 -0.641 -0.327 -0.846 -0.319 -0.852
1850/05 -0.385 -0.306 -0.465 -0.126 -0.644 -0.328 -0.432 -0.115 -0.656 -0.109 -0.660
1850/06 -0.311 -0.232 -0.390 -0.092 -0.531 -0.255 -0.358 -0.078 -0.544 -0.071 -0.549
1850/07 -0.237 -0.159 -0.315  0.033 -0.507 -0.181 -0.285  0.044 -0.518  0.050 -0.523
1850/08 -0.340 -0.259 -0.421 -0.035 -0.645 -0.286 -0.384 -0.024 -0.656 -0.020 -0.659
1850/09 -0.510 -0.424 -0.596 -0.207 -0.813 -0.460 -0.554 -0.195 -0.825 -0.191 -0.828
1850/10 -0.504 -0.415 -0.592 -0.225 -0.783 -0.447 -0.551 -0.211 -0.796 -0.206 -0.800
1850/11 -0.259 -0.181 -0.337 -0.035 -0.482 -0.203 -0.308 -0.022 -0.496 -0.015 -0.501

Coldest monthly anomaly since 1850 in hadcruts is early 1864
-0.930 

This july within hadcruts was +.46

So .46+(.93)=1.36c monthly difference in the anomaly.

To all the skepics that point out the graph of the US temperature for 1934 and somehow say it is the global temperature, well here you go! This is the global data for 1934!


1933/09 -0.254 -0.223 -0.285 -0.053 -0.454 -0.156 -0.344 -0.051 -0.457 -0.028 -0.476
1933/10 -0.217 -0.184 -0.249 -0.053 -0.381 -0.105 -0.312 -0.049 -0.384 -0.016 -0.409
1933/11 -0.326 -0.296 -0.356 -0.188 -0.465 -0.218 -0.417 -0.184 -0.468 -0.148 -0.494
1933/12 -0.539 -0.507 -0.571 -0.390 -0.688 -0.436 -0.633 -0.387 -0.691 -0.355 -0.718
1934/01 -0.257 -0.225 -0.289 -0.068 -0.446 -0.157 -0.348 -0.066 -0.448 -0.041 -0.469
1934/02 -0.232 -0.199 -0.265 -0.078 -0.387 -0.137 -0.328 -0.074 -0.390 -0.048 -0.417
1934/03 -0.422 -0.392 -0.453 -0.256 -0.589 -0.325 -0.512 -0.253 -0.592 -0.227 -0.614
1934/04 -0.275 -0.244 -0.306 -0.106 -0.443 -0.175 -0.371 -0.103 -0.446 -0.076 -0.471
1934/05 -0.136 -0.106 -0.167  0.031 -0.304 -0.044 -0.229  0.034 -0.307  0.058 -0.330
1934/06 -0.052 -0.021 -0.082  0.095 -0.198  0.051 -0.142  0.098 -0.201  0.130 -0.226
1934/07 -0.071 -0.039 -0.103  0.122 -0.265  0.030 -0.162  0.125 -0.267  0.150 -0.287
1934/08 -0.058 -0.027 -0.089  0.184 -0.300  0.038 -0.147  0.186 -0.302  0.204 -0.318
1934/09 -0.102 -0.072 -0.131  0.102 -0.305 -0.003 -0.189  0.104 -0.307  0.127 -0.325
1934/10 -0.112 -0.081 -0.143  0.053 -0.277 -0.007 -0.208  0.056 -0.280  0.086 -0.305
1934/11 -0.016  0.014 -0.046  0.116 -0.148  0.090 -0.107  0.119 -0.151  0.156 -0.179
1934/12 -0.177 -0.146 -0.208 -0.024 -0.330 -0.072 -0.274 -0.021 -0.334  0.011 -0.361
1935/01 -0.225 -0.192 -0.259 -0.032 -0.419 -0.124 -0.318 -0.029 -0.422 -0.005 -0.443
1935/02  0.042  0.074  0.009  0.200 -0.116  0.140 -0.055  0.203 -0.120  0.231 -0.146
1935/03 -0.247 -0.216 -0.277 -0.081 -0.412 -0.153 -0.335 -0.078 -0.415 -0.054 -0.437


----------



## edthecynic (Sep 19, 2011)

westwall said:


> Trakar said:
> 
> 
> > Globe had eighth warmest August on record
> ...


Just as I predicted, when deniers insisted on using US temperatures rather than global temps while the US temps were lower than the global temps, as soon as US temps become warm the deniers will switch to some other place on the globe, no matter how small, that has cool temps. Blue areas for deniers to cherry-pick are getting fewer and farther between!


----------



## westwall (Sep 19, 2011)

edthecynic said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > Trakar said:
> ...







Just pointing out what your non-falsifiable pseudo scientific religious zealots do every time it gets hot....somewhere.  Go take it up with them.


----------



## Old Rocks (Sep 19, 2011)

LOL.  In other words, you were caught again. And, since the temps worldwide have been going up for 150 years, and rather rapidly in the last 30 years, you have no real reply. Look at that map. We are in the second La Nina this year. Yet the map has the measles. Just a few minor areas cooler than the norm. 

Walleyes, once again you have been proven full of shit. Sure, it's going to get cooler. You have been stating that since you started posting. But it has continued warming in spite of a low TSI and some very strong La Ninas. As a prophet, you had better keep your day job.


----------



## Old Rocks (Sep 19, 2011)

*The individual molecule idiocy is just another fancy way of lying.*

CO2 has a short residence time

A little quick counting shows that about 200 Gt C leaves and enters the atmosphere each year. As a first approximation then, given the reservoir size of 750 Gt, we can work out that the residence time of a given molecule of CO2 is 750 Gt C / 200 Gt C y-1 = about 3-4 years. (However, careful counting up of the sources (supply) and sinks (removal) shows that there is a net imbalance; carbon in the atmosphere is increasing by about 3.3 Gt per year). 

It is true that an individual molecule of CO2 has a short residence time in the atmosphere. However, in most cases when a molecule of CO2 leaves the atmosphere it is simply swapping places with one in the ocean. Thus, the warming potential of CO2 has very little to do with the residence time of CO2. 

What really governs the warming potential is how long the extra CO2 remains in the atmosphere. CO2 is essentially chemically inert in the atmosphere and is only removed by biological uptake and by dissolving into the ocean. Biological uptake (with the exception of fossil fuel formation) is carbon neutral: Every tree that grows will eventually die and decompose, thereby releasing CO2. (Yes, there are maybe some gains to be made from reforestation but they are probably minor compared to fossil fuel releases). 

Dissolution of CO2 into the oceans is fast but the problem is that the top of the ocean is getting full and the bottleneck is thus the transfer of carbon from surface waters to the deep ocean. This transfer largely occurs by the slow ocean basin circulation and turn over (*3). This turnover takes 500-1000ish years. Therefore a time scale for CO2 warming potential out as far as 500 years is entirely reasonable (See IPCC 4th Assessment Report Section 2.10).


----------



## westwall (Sep 19, 2011)

Old Rocks said:


> LOL.  In other words, you were caught again. And, since the temps worldwide have been going up for 150 years, and rather rapidly in the last 30 years, you have no real reply. Look at that map. We are in the second La Nina this year. Yet the map has the measles. Just a few minor areas cooler than the norm.
> 
> Walleyes, once again you have been proven full of shit. Sure, it's going to get cooler. You have been stating that since you started posting. But it has continued warming in spite of a low TSI and some very strong La Ninas. As a prophet, you had better keep your day job.







Well, you know, considering the *LITTLE ICE AGE ENDED 150* years ago I would *EXPECT* the global temperatures to *GO UP* you half wit.  My gosh do you have ANY education?

As far as your contention about the supposed increase in warming there is only corrupted data to support your contention, on the other hand we have three years running now where the winter temps have been dropping and additionally now the summers are getting shorter and things are dying of cold in the beginning stages of the Fall season.

The only person more full of shit than me is you MENSA boy!


----------



## Trakar (Sep 19, 2011)

Matthew said:


> ...Noaa is the half way point between hadley center and Giss and UAH in my opinion....



Your experience is different than mine, ...are you sure you are not conflating HAD-CRU with the NOAA datasets?

Had-CRU typically runs at the midpoint between GISS and UAH and excludes most of the polar regions. NOAA generally includes both Arctic and Antarctic data. 





> The merged land air and sea surface temperature anomaly analysis is based on data from the Global Historical Climatology Network (GHCN) of land temperatures and the International Comprehensive Ocean-Atmosphere Data Set (ICOADS) of Sea Surface Temperature (SST) data. Temperature anomalies with respect to 1961-1990 are analyzed separately. The analyzed monthly temperature anomalies are then merged to form the global analysis. More dataset information can be found at NCDC's Global Surface Temperature Anomaly webpage. This is the dataset NOAA uses for global temperature monitoring.


NOAA merged land air and sea surface temperature dataset

There are 5 sources of global temperature data which are most often referred to in climate research. Three of them are estimates of surface temperature, from NASA GISS (Goddard Institute for Space Studies), HadCRU (Hadley Centre/Climate Research Unit in the U.K.), and NCDC (National Climate Data Center). The other two are estimates of lower-troposphere temperature, from RSS (Remote Sensing Systems) and UAH (Univ. of Alabama at Huntsville). 

The NCDC contains Arctic and Antarctic station data, as far as I can tell.
Historical Arctic and Antarctic Surface Observational Data


----------



## ScienceRocks (Sep 19, 2011)

Trakar said:


> Matthew said:
> 
> 
> > ...Noaa is the half way point between hadley center and Giss and UAH in my opinion....
> ...




Not in the way giss and UAH includes them...That is why I said noaa excludes at least 20 percent of the arctic and 80 percent of Antarctica...It doesn't smooth the anomaly across both as the giss and doesn't have anywhere near the ability to see them as uah. I didn't say the noaa didn't have NO data from those area's, but they don't try to have total coverage as the giss and UAH(yes it does miss a little of both).

Seriously there are maybe 3-4 stations on the noaa map within the arctic and most of the coverage is on the coast of Antarctic, with maybe one or two over that huge continent. I'd take a satellite like Uah that has most of the view of such over it and back the giss smoothing up with it.


----------



## Trakar (Sep 19, 2011)

Matthew said:


> ...I'd take a satellite like Uah that has most of the view of such over it and back the giss smoothing up with it.



I'll have to research a bit about the NCDC networks but your information sounds incorrect with regards to their Arctic and Antarctic stations and data,..as to the UAH, its data is also included in NOAA analyses, the primary problem is that it indirectly measures air mass data rather than actual surface temperatures. The UAH satellite temperature dataset attempts to infer the temperature of the atmosphere at various levels from satellite measurements of radiance.


Historical Arctic and Antarctic Surface Observational Data
Data are from 105 automatic weather stations in Iceland and Greenland, and 137 stations in Antarctica. 

Historical Arctic and Antarctic Surface Observational Data

The arctic stations are limited to Greenland and Iceland, but the Antarctic stations seem well distributed. It is important to understand that NOAA, however uses an integrated dataset that does include several satellite surface temp sets of data.

NCDC: Global Surface Temperature Anomalies


----------



## ScienceRocks (Sep 19, 2011)

Holy crap, NINA all the way to May in 2012. Another nina year.


----------



## ScienceRocks (Sep 19, 2011)

Here is what the ipcc said for the next two decades

A temperature rise of about 0.1 °C per decade would be expected for the next two decades, even if greenhouse gas and aerosol concentrations were kept at year 2000 levels.
A temperature rise of about 0.2 °C per decade is projected for the next two decades for all SRES scenarios.

IPCC Fourth Assessment Report - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## ScienceRocks (Sep 19, 2011)

What is a record? Well a record is what is considered within the historic time frame to be the highest or lowest temperature to have occurred on a day.


If you have a record that goes back to 1880...This is 130 years; to be honest to have a increase of warm over cold records shows that the area of intense heat on earth has to have expanded to a point that the cold area's only make cold record for this summer within the USA by 1 out of every 11th record. Look at the "satellite" graphic I've posted on some threads and you will understand that the area of much warmer then the means is much larger then the much colder then means. A record is the extreme, so you need just that to grow in size and scope to the point that it covers more reporting stations to make more records in that directions(record HIGHS and RECORD MAXIMUM LOWS). 

Like, I've noted earlier...If you have a area of 15,000,000 sq miles of above avg and 2,000,000 sq miles what do you think is going to produce the majority of records? Well, of course records are the extreme, but the area of 15,000,000 sq miles will produce much more records.

When you're dealing with intense heat like that sat over the midwest and east this summer lets just say that you're going to get records. If you have the majority of the area of +4 to +12c with a bulls eye over Texas you'll get more records with that then a area over the west coast of -2 to -3c anomaly's. First of all you're looking for record highs and record maximum minimums within the extreme heat area's and record minimum maximums(highs) within the cold area's...There wasn't that many record lows on the other hand...Some, but not many.


----------



## IanC (Sep 20, 2011)

I dont know if temperatures are normally distributed or not but if they are it is a well know characteristic that small changes in the average compute to large differences in the tails. someone less mathematically challenged than me could probably take the change in temps over the last 100 years (in standard deviation units) and work out what the probabilities are for the ratio of hot/cold records. guesstimating I think a one SD increase of temp would relate to a 6x increase of area at the +2SD area of the curve, 15x for 3SD. of course it depends on the specific qualities of the curve, which I dont know.


----------



## Chris (Sep 20, 2011)

Record Events for Tue Sep 13, 2011 through Mon Sep 19, 2011 

High Temperatures: 459 
Low Temperatures: 251 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## ScienceRocks (Sep 21, 2011)

Ok, this is from 1990-2011...I started it before the massive vei 6 volcano in 1990...Remember, 1999-2005 was a warm enso pattern, but 2006-2011 are mostly cold...So with this stuff in mind here is how it would look like.

Started in 1990 so I didn't have to include the climb out of the vei 6.
More or less trends it within the means from 1990-2011
Added a thin black line for a forecast from 2011-2015.
Last, but not least added a blue dash line to show the difference between 1990 and 2011.

I feel 1990 is a good year to start as 1992-1994 is within the basement of the giant eruption.  1993-1998 is climbing out of it. You don't choose 1998 for the same reason as it is a huge anomaly. Do you agree?


----------



## ScienceRocks (Sep 24, 2011)

This one is like the one in the post above, but with many temperature data bases. I didn't start during the climb out of the huge volcano in 1992-1995, but again started in 1990. Looks pretty linear to me. Maybe a slight slow down since 2005, but that is all. 

The two sided arrow is the temperature change of the means from 2000-2011.

anomaly years *DON'T mean a thing* as it's the means that's important when looking at the general climate change. It is more or less a short term "weather"(Climate) pattern like the enso that lasts on the scale of months that makes for the high anomaly. All that matters is the rising of the means...That is in black.

Lastly, I go back to 1980 with the giss and what you will find is linear from 1990-2011...This graph is on the right of the ensemble of temperature graph.


----------



## ScienceRocks (Sep 26, 2011)

strength

Climate Prediction Center 9/26/11 update

La Nina gets a bit stronger,now down to -0.8C.


Niño 4= -0.7ºC
Niño 3.4= -0.8ºC
Niño 3= -0.6ºC
Niño 1+2= -0.8ºC

Slightly stronger


----------



## Chris (Sep 26, 2011)

Record Events for Mon Sep 19, 2011 through Sun Sep 25, 2011 

High Temperatures: 308 
Low Temperatures: 33 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## Chris (Sep 27, 2011)

Record Events for Tue Sep 20, 2011 through Mon Sep 26, 2011 

High Temperatures: 396 
Low Temperatures: 37 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## Chris (Sep 29, 2011)

Record Events for Thu Sep 22, 2011 through Wed Sep 28, 2011 

High Temperatures: 509 
Low Temperatures: 40 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## ScienceRocks (Sep 30, 2011)

Hadcrut  for August--->2011/08 0.458

Here is last August--->2010/08 0.485

So -.027 colder then last August...Which is not much when considering last August was only 3 months after the strong nino. By Sept/Oct of 2011 the nina really did have a big effect, but August not a big one.

I enjoy doing this and will use the tools that we do have to keep doing it.


----------



## skookerasbil (Oct 1, 2011)




----------



## editec (Oct 1, 2011)

Matthew said:


> Hadcrut for August--->2011/08 0.458
> 
> Here is last August--->2010/08 0.485
> 
> ...


 
_Phew!_  There's an awful lot of RED area on that map.

Just look at Texax!

over 10 degrees higher than "normal".

Guess WAY HOT is the new normal for our chums in the Lone Star State.


----------



## Old Rocks (Oct 2, 2011)

Far more dangerous, look at the red in the Arctic and Antarctic.


----------



## ScienceRocks (Oct 4, 2011)

.29c for Sept, which is 5th for UAH.

1998
2005
2009
2010

This is easily the coldest nina years overall since the 1999-2001 event to, which never had a nina below -1.5c within 3.4...So you'll have to go into the 1974-1976 event to find raw power of this nina string.


----------



## ScienceRocks (Oct 5, 2011)

Top 10 sept for RSS(9th)...Mostly because UAH includes 90 percent of Antarctica and this includes nearly none of it. The tropics have a bigger stake within rss then UAH because of this.

2011  9    0.288 

1995
1998
2002
2003
2005
2006
2009
2010


----------



## westwall (Oct 5, 2011)

I just had three inches of snow fall this morning.  Earliest ever since I've been here.  Of course I'm positive that snow arrived earlier in the distant past but I'm going to use a AGW proponents metric and only care about ME!


----------



## Chris (Oct 6, 2011)

Record Events for Thu Sep 29, 2011 through Wed Oct 5, 2011 

High Temperatures: 438 
Low Temperatures: 149 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## westwall (Oct 6, 2011)

Chris said:


> Record Events for Thu Sep 29, 2011 through Wed Oct 5, 2011
> 
> High Temperatures: 438
> Low Temperatures: 149
> ...






Earliest start for WINTER that anyone around here can remember!

The Sierra region is under the first winter storm warning of the season today as a cold and aggressive storm system moves through the area.

While it's not cold enough to bring the snow level all the way down to the lowest valley elevations during the day today, we could see some flakes mix in overnight tonight as our low temperatures will drop into the 30s for the first time in a long time.

But it still will be the mountains that receive the lion's share of this storm "» possibly as much as a foot of snow in some areas when it's all said and done.

The amount of rain we get down here will be significantly less than its water equivalent up in the hills because of the rain shadow.

There's often a misconception when it comes to what causes the rain shadow. Many think that the mountains simply block the water in the air from getting over into the valley, but that's not the case.

I'll tell you how it really works on Thursday.

Ask Mike Alger a question at malger@ktvn.com.


----------



## Old Rocks (Oct 7, 2011)

Looks like the weather was just letting Walleyes know what it thinks of him. Look at the map, he is isolated, with most of the rest getting warm weather

http://mapcenter.hamweather.com/records/7day/us.html?c=maxtemp,mintemp,lowmax,highmin


----------



## westwall (Oct 7, 2011)

Old Rocks said:


> Looks like the weather was just letting Walleyes know what it thinks of him. Look at the map, he is isolated, with most of the rest getting warm weather
> 
> HAMweather Climate Center - Record Events for The Past Week - Continental US View







Yes, you can clearly make out the cold front that extends from pretty much the entire west coast, through Colorado and and the rest of the middle midwest and then on up to the north east US.  The warm areas are high midwest and lower midwest.

In other words the majority of the US is cold.  Also please notice up in your neck of the woods those red dots right next to cold dots.  How much you want to bet that those are weather stations sited on airports and other hot spots.

Map reading isn't a strong point with you is it.


----------



## Old Rocks (Oct 7, 2011)

LOL.  The blue dots are low max temps, not record lows. And it is very possible in the areas East of the Cascades in Oregon to have both cheek and jowl.

But you knew that, right?


----------



## Old Rocks (Oct 7, 2011)

Yep, it is cold right now for Eastern Oregon. Saw snow, briefly, down to 3000 ft Wedsnesday. All kinds of Portland hunters packing up and heading home. Funny. Now is the best time to hunt, the weather will be bringing the big deer down from the high country. Even saw over 60 head of Elk down low.


----------



## Chris (Oct 8, 2011)

Record Events for Sat Oct 1, 2011 through Fri Oct 7, 2011 

High Temperatures: 362 
Low Temperatures: 184 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## Chris (Oct 11, 2011)

Record Events for Tue Oct 4, 2011 through Mon Oct 10, 2011 

High Temperatures: 378 
Low Temperatures: 111 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## skookerasbil (Oct 11, 2011)

Chris said:


> Record Events for Tue Oct 4, 2011 through Mon Oct 10, 2011
> 
> High Temperatures: 378
> Low Temperatures: 111
> ...











Keep putting it on the tee s0n..................


----------



## percysunshine (Oct 11, 2011)

I have this idea....USweatherthread.com

It can work...we will all be millionaires.


----------



## TakePart (Oct 19, 2011)

Has anyone noticed a change in the climate where they are? What is different? How are things different? Is their a big change? Very curious if people have been feeling anything. 

-TakePart


----------



## Old Rocks (Oct 19, 2011)

*Yes. I was born in '43. Have lived in various parts of Oregon and Washington all of my life. Also have traveled extensively in the Western States. 

The winters in Eastern Oregon are far warmer than they used to be. Seneca had, routinely, temps below -40 in my youth. Today, a very cold year results in a few nights with -30 temps.*

Seneca Oregons Icebox

Seneca is quite capable of generating a week-long string of 40 below zero nights in any sizeable Arctic cold snap; the last time it did so was in 1989 (the year the Exxon Valdez oil tanker ran aground in Alaska). Officially, Seneca has been down to 54 below zero F; unofficial Old Timer reports from before the establishment of the official weather station recorded 60 below zero in the Big Cold Snap of 1927, and 1924 is also mentioned as a year where it likely was lower than 55 below, and one wonders also about early December 1919, when many records were set that still stand today, eg. Yakima, WA at 24 below on Dec. 13th........Back in 1931 Seneca came onto the weather reporting stage with a bang, and soon was setting State records left and right, eg. during the very nasty winter of 1931-32, where the lonely town was hit with what appear to be four sucessive arctic air invasions... seeing 30 below Nov. 29, more serious cold Dec. 15 where it went to 38 below, then worse yet January 23 at 41 below, and finally a late winter smash perhaps still not equalled in Oregon history, a 49 below on February 14, 1932..... Due to Seneca's known potential to set a new State temperature record even colder than 54 below, the Weather Service in 1995 installed a special type of arctic thermometer at Seneca, capable of reading directly to 60 below zero without error (but will "Global Warming" make this pointless, see bottom of this page).

*Also, Prairie City has apricots and grape vines now, something that was simply not there in my youth. Snows go off ealier, and start later. This year and last year are exceptions to that. La Nina. 

On the Washington and Oregon coasts, and inland valleys, more thunderstorms than I remember when we lived there in the 50s and 60s. 

My Great Grandfather settled in Eastern Oregon about 1870. My grandfather was born there in 1888. My mother, in 1926. My grandfather told me that in his youth the area was colder and wetter than it was later in his life. He said the change started about the same time as WW1. The high dessert south of the John Day Valley also saw similiar changes. Much reduced carrying capacity for grazing cows and sheep after the '20s.*


----------



## gslack (Oct 19, 2011)

HaHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAAAAAA..

Pathetic, you get a sock to bump threads and ask setup questions like that? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAA!


----------



## Old Rocks (Oct 20, 2011)

Vig links, g-idiot, vig links.


----------



## gslack (Oct 20, 2011)

Old Rocks said:


> Vig links, g-idiot, vig links.



yeah which your pal admits are there now after you lied for him.. Nice..


----------



## Old Rocks (Oct 20, 2011)

No, they are not there for my computer, and I did what you said to do to see them. Posted what I saw, also.


----------



## gslack (Oct 20, 2011)

Old Rocks said:


> No, they are not there for my computer, and I did what you said to do to see them. Posted what I saw, also.



Well if ya did it the way I told ya too you would, he does now... So....Awkward huh... 

Socks I think you need to read up on things before you run off at the mouth on me...


----------



## Chris (Mar 14, 2012)

Record Events for Wed Mar 7, 2012 through Tue Mar 13, 2012 

High Temperatures: 810 

Low Temperatures: 115 

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## Big Fitz (Mar 14, 2012)

Oh my, what a surprise.  After 5 months of normal weather, you pop up with the first heat wave of the year.

We are so fooled.  You must be right.


----------



## Old Rocks (Mar 15, 2012)

La Nina year, the second in a row. Should not be as warm as it has been through the winter, let alone having this kind of heat in March.


----------



## westwall (Mar 15, 2012)

Old Rocks said:


> La Nina year, the second in a row. Should not be as warm as it has been through the winter, let alone having this kind of heat in March.







Tell that to the europeans.


----------



## Old Rocks (Mar 15, 2012)

westwall said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> > La Nina year, the second in a row. Should not be as warm as it has been through the winter, let alone having this kind of heat in March.
> ...



The majority of the temps prior to 1998 were colder than any of the months of this winter.

UAH Global Temperature Update for February 2012: -0.12 deg. C « Roy Spencer, Ph. D.


----------



## skookerasbil (Mar 15, 2012)

LMAO....a must see.......Dennis Miller on The O'Reilly Factor last night........commentary on Al Gore........


*"all these wonderful temperatures in winter and Al Gore is the only one bummed out about it!!!"*



Fox News - Breaking News Updates | Latest News Headlines | Photos & News Videos


----------



## OohPooPahDoo (Mar 16, 2012)

Big Fitz said:


> Oh my, what a surprise.  After 5 months of normal weather, you pop up with the first heat wave of the year.
> 
> We are so fooled.  You must be right.



2011 was the hottest La Nina year ever recorded

Climate change: 2011 temperatures the hottest ever during La Nina - CSMonitor.com


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Mar 16, 2012)

Chris said:


> Record Events for Wed Mar 7, 2012 through Tue Mar 13, 2012
> 
> High Temperatures: 810
> 
> ...



115 record lows?

Thats global warming?

LOL


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Mar 16, 2012)

Warming means:

a. warmer
b. cooler
c. all of the above
d. whatever the weather is outside at the moment
e. all of the above


----------



## percysunshine (Mar 16, 2012)

Chris said:


> Record Events for Wed Mar 7, 2012 through Tue Mar 13, 2012
> 
> High Temperatures: 810
> 
> ...




And Europe is experiencing a new ice age this year.

So what is your point?


----------



## Big Fitz (Mar 16, 2012)

OohPooPahDoo said:


> Big Fitz said:
> 
> 
> > Oh my, what a surprise.  After 5 months of normal weather, you pop up with the first heat wave of the year.
> ...


Regardless of WHAT the climate was from opinion to hysteria, it's still not man's fault, and out of man's ability to change.

That is still fact till proven otherwise, and that certainly hasn't been done.

Oh and how does that change the fact that the 7th snowiest winter on record for most of the upper midwest happened last year?  Ohhh that's right.... it doesn't.


----------



## Big Fitz (Mar 16, 2012)

percysunshine said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > Record Events for Wed Mar 7, 2012 through Tue Mar 13, 2012
> ...


we must become a global fascist state with them in charge or we'll all die.


----------



## Chris (Mar 16, 2012)

We have melted 40% of the North polar ice cap in the last 50 years.

CO2 levels are the highest ever recorded, the the Antarctic ice core record goes back 600,000 years.

We will add another 3 trillion tons of CO2 to the atmosphere in the next 100 years.

Ocean temperatures are the highest ever recorded.

And the feedback effects of less ice and melting arctic methane will make it even worse.

We are warming the earth, my friends.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Mar 16, 2012)

Chris said:


> We have melted 40% of the North polar ice cap in the last 50 years.
> 
> CO2 levels are the highest ever recorded, the the Antarctic ice core record goes back 600,000 years.
> 
> ...



We don't care that you are a fruit cake.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Mar 16, 2012)

Chris here is another fruitcake brother of your's
Melting Arctic link to cold, snowy UK winters

BBC News - Melting Arctic link to cold, snowy UK winters

Melting ice means cold winter?


----------



## daveman (Mar 16, 2012)

Chris said:


> We have melted 40% of the North polar ice cap in the last 50 years.
> 
> CO2 levels are the highest ever recorded, the the Antarctic ice core record goes back 600,000 years.
> 
> ...


Maybe if you stamp your feet and threaten to hold your breath until you turn blue, people will buy your nonsense.

Because you don't have science on your side.  All you have is emotionalism and unearned arrogance.


----------



## RollingThunder (Mar 16, 2012)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > We have melted 40% of the North polar ice cap in the last 50 years.
> ...



And nobody minds that you are an clueless retard. 

But none of that affects the fact that everything that Chris just said is provably true, you poor brainwashed fool.






daveman said:


> Maybe if you stamp your feet and threaten to hold your breath until you turn blue, people will buy your nonsense. Because you don't have science on your side.  All you have is emotionalism and unearned arrogance.


Oh, DaveDumb, you wouldn't know actual 'science' if it bit you. All you have is ignorant stupidity and arrogant cluelessness.


----------



## Chris (Mar 16, 2012)

Record Events for Fri Mar 9, 2012 through Thu Mar 15, 2012 

High Temperatures: 1587 
Low Temperatures: 30 

Just look at this map....

HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## westwall (Mar 16, 2012)

Chris said:


> We have melted 40% of the North polar ice cap in the last 50 years.
> 
> CO2 levels are the highest ever recorded, the the Antarctic ice core record goes back 600,000 years.
> 
> ...








Really?  Take a look at the picture silly person.  We haven't been able to get three subs at the North Pole in open water since 1987.  Good luck trying to do it now.  The polar ice cap is well looky here...tied with the highest ever extent.

Time to change your meme there bucko, it's as full of poo as you are.


----------



## westwall (Mar 16, 2012)

Chris said:


> Record Events for Fri Mar 9, 2012 through Thu Mar 15, 2012
> 
> High Temperatures: 1587
> Low Temperatures: 30
> ...






Who cares.  Look at Europe.  They're freezing their asses off and we are fortunate to get as mild winter here.  We had 4 hard winters in a row here in Northern Nevada where we didn't really get a spring.  This is making up for those years.   You know averages...that's what averages mean.


----------



## westwall (Mar 16, 2012)

RollingThunder said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...







  PROVE IT!  SHOW US SOME PEER REVIEWED STUDIES THAT SHOW ANY OF IT IS TRUE.

Clowns.


----------



## daveman (Mar 16, 2012)

RollingThunder said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Maybe if you stamp your feet and threaten to hold your breath until you turn blue, people will buy your nonsense. Because you don't have science on your side.  All you have is emotionalism and unearned arrogance.
> ...


I've seen what you cultists are calling science.  It's crap.  

True story.


----------



## Chris (Mar 16, 2012)

daveman said:


> RollingThunder said:
> 
> 
> > daveman said:
> ...



HAMweather Climate Center - Record High Temperatures for The Past Week - Continental US View


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Mar 16, 2012)

RollingThunder said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...


Yell like the melting arctic ice is making a cold snowy winter. You idiots need to get your peer review together before you make yourself look like even bigger idiots.


----------



## daveman (Mar 16, 2012)

Chris said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > RollingThunder said:
> ...


That's weather.  And weather is not climate.

Continued massive thread fail.


----------



## RollingThunder (Mar 16, 2012)

Old Rocks said:


> La Nina year, the second in a row. Should not be as warm as it has been through the winter, let alone having this kind of heat in March.



The ENSO has been in either a La Nina or a neutral phase for a long time, keeping parts of the Pacific ocean surface cooler and suppressing hurricane formation, but NASA says the current lingering La Niña conditions are expected to dissipate by the end of April this year and most of the climate models are predicting a transition to neutral ENSO state by the end of April and then a strong inclination towards a weak to moderate El Niño by July of 2012. If that happens, the second half of the year may wind up being much warmer than the first half of the year and the hurricane season may be very energetic in comparison to the last few years. Also the sun is coming out of an somewhat extended minimum period and is approaching a new solar maximum that is predicted to peak around May of 2013. This just-ending extra-long solar minimum combined with the long lingering La Nina conditions combined to slightly suppress the instrumental evidence of the ongoing warming trend induced by the rising levels of greenhouse gases, although that increase in thermal energy is still evident in other ways. But as these two natural cyclic factors switch polarities, so to speak, they will be amplifying the warming effects instead of masking them, which means we will probably see a number of new high world average temperature records set in the next few years. Perhaps not this year as a whole because of the lingering La Nina/neutral conditions through the summer, but almost certainly the latter part of this year and 2013 will set some new records, both for temperatures and for loss of Arctic ice mass and other climate change indicators.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Mar 16, 2012)

daveman said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > daveman said:
> ...


I bet chris would have been in real panic mode during hot temperature of the 1300's


----------



## daveman (Mar 16, 2012)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...


American SUV and coal CO2 is SOOOOOO evil, it goes back in time and warms the earth!!


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Mar 16, 2012)

Chris said:


> We have melted 40% of the North polar ice cap in the last 50 years.
> 
> CO2 levels are the highest ever recorded, the the Antarctic ice core record goes back 600,000 years.
> 
> ...



3 trillion tons?

Wow

That's almost a rounding error compared to the weight of the atmosphere


----------



## daveman (Mar 16, 2012)

CrusaderFrank said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > We have melted 40% of the North polar ice cap in the last 50 years.
> ...



The average mass of the atmosphere is about 5 quadrillion (5×1015) tonnes...​
...or 5.51155655 × 10 to the 15th power short tons, or 5,511,556,550,000,000 tons.

3 trillion is 0.0544 percent.

Yup.  Rounding error.  Lost in the background noise.

Got any more big scary numbers to frighten us with, Chris?


----------



## FactFinder (Mar 17, 2012)

Weather events should not be confused with climate.


----------



## westwall (Mar 17, 2012)

FactFinder said:


> Weather events should not be confused with climate.







Ohhh, don't start using science and logic on them.  It makes their heads hurt.


----------



## saveliberty (Mar 17, 2012)

I see the Faithers are trying to scare us with drowning this week.  We all have to do the backstroke by 2050.  Poor bastards.


----------



## RollingThunder (Mar 17, 2012)

FactFinder said:


> Weather events should not be confused with climate.



Perhaps you're unclear about the actual difference between 'weather' and 'climate'.

*Climate*
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
*Climate encompasses the statistics of temperature, humidity, atmospheric pressure, wind, precipitation, atmospheric particle count and other meteorological elemental measurements in a given region over long periods. Climate can be contrasted to weather, which is the present condition of these elements and their variations over shorter periods. *

'Climate' is just the statistical average of all of the "weather events" that occurred over a long period. 'Weather' is the day to day actual conditions - temperature, rain, wind, etc..

Looking at statistical trends over time in something like record hot vs record cold temperatures *is* a study of *climate* trends and these trends are scientifically significant.

*Preliminary Data Lift March Heat Records to Nearly 19 Times Cold Records*
March 16, 2012
(excerpts)
*The surge of early spring heat records reached over 400 yesterday alone in preliminary reports from the National Climatic Data Center. This includes 68 official National Weather Service locations out of 290 possible records. In other words, over 23% of all official reporting locations in the entire U.S. set new daily records for March 15. This brings the total number of new heat records for the month so far to 1757, which is 18.7 times the number of cold records. Including the number of ties, the total number of record high temperatures for March to date is nearly 2300. For the year to date, the ratio of heat records to cold records is over 14 to 1.*





*Monthly ratio of daily high temperature to low temperature records set in the U.S. for January 2011 through March 15, 2012, seasonal ratio for summer and fall 2011, winter 2011-2012, and annual ratio for 2012 and 2011*


----------



## daveman (Mar 17, 2012)

14 months of weather is not climate.


----------



## bripat9643 (Mar 17, 2012)

daveman said:


> 14 months of weather is not climate.



the number of "records" doesn't mean squat.  One reason, they didn't have such good records in the past.  Two, meteorologists can invent new criteria for records that were never used in the past.  

They can't win on the global average temperature issue any longer, because that is obviously declining, so they invent some new statistic that they can easily maniuplate.


----------



## daveman (Mar 17, 2012)

bripat9643 said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > 14 months of weather is not climate.
> ...


Of course.  The science simply doesn't back up their claims.


----------



## westwall (Mar 17, 2012)

RollingThunder said:


> FactFinder said:
> 
> 
> > Weather events should not be confused with climate.
> ...








No, no, I think it has been shown quite clearly that you and your fellow religious fanatics have no clue how the world operates.  Cause and Effect went out the window when the warming stopped and the temps leveled off.  

Then, to further your religious asperations, your high priests have had to resort to all manner of fraud to try and prop up the tenets of AGW.

Nice try but like all frauds and religious cults you are doomed to fail....."IT'S YOUR DESTINY!"


----------



## westwall (Mar 17, 2012)

daveman said:


> 14 months of weather is not climate.







According to them one DAY is "climate"!


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Mar 17, 2012)

RollingThunder said:


> FactFinder said:
> 
> 
> > Weather events should not be confused with climate.
> ...



do you have the data that was discarded before peer review could take place?


----------



## westwall (Mar 17, 2012)

bripat9643 said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > 14 months of weather is not climate.
> ...







Yep it's easy to set temp records when you only use weather stations surrounded by acres of tarmac like those at airports.  How about using the weather stations out in the boondocks where there is no blacktop?  OOOOOPPPs!  Might not get the results they want now would they.


What a bunch of tools they are.


----------



## daveman (Mar 17, 2012)

westwall said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > 14 months of weather is not climate.
> ...


Unless it's a cold snap, of course.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Mar 17, 2012)

westwall said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> > daveman said:
> ...



Why not their data doesn't matter because they will just discard it when their peers want to review it.


----------



## RollingThunder (Mar 17, 2012)

daveman said:


> 14 months of weather is not climate.


Too bad you're so ignorant, davedumb, or you might already know that this trend started in the 1980's, not 14 months ago. Over that 10 year period (1980 -1989) the ratio of record hot days to record cold days was only 1.14 to 1. In the 90's the ratio rose to 1.36 to 1 and then in the first decade of the new millennium the ratio rose again to 2 to 1. In 2011 the ratio rose to 2.8 to 1. Now, for this year to date, we seeing a ratio of 14 to 1. If temperatures were not warming, the number of record daily highs and lows being set each year would be approximately even. Over 30 years of increasing high temperatures and decreasing low temperatures is quite definitely a reflection of a changing climate.


----------



## daveman (Mar 17, 2012)

RollingThunder said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > 14 months of weather is not climate.
> ...


No one's saying the climate isn't changing, dumbass.  

We're saying man has little to do with it, your emotionalism and fear-mongering notwithstanding.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Mar 17, 2012)

RollingThunder said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > 14 months of weather is not climate.
> ...


Rolling turd, more like running squirt we've always had climate, it's called fall winter spring summer. The earth cools and warms as it pleases. Did you find that discarded data yet?


----------



## RollingThunder (Mar 17, 2012)

daveman said:


> RollingThunder said:
> 
> 
> > daveman said:
> ...



Well sure, you and your denier cult butt-buddies say that, but then you're all ignorant brainwashed retards with your heads wedged firmly up your asses so what you say is just meaningless noise. The world scientific community says that the current abrupt warming trend and the climate changes produced by that warming are definitely being caused by mankind's activities, primarily the burning of fossil fuels and deforestation. Too bad you and your fellow cultists are too stupid and poorly educated to be able to understand the science or to realize how badly you've been duped by the people with a huge financial stake in selling fossil fuels.


----------



## RollingThunder (Mar 17, 2012)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> RollingThunder said:
> 
> 
> > daveman said:
> ...


Wow, bigshthd, you sure are stupid! So stupid and ignorant in fact, that you don't even know that "_fall winter spring summer_" are the nominal 'seasons of the year' in certain parts of the world and they have nothing to do with "_climate_". Saying that "_the earth cools and warms as it pleases_" is just a kind of insane and very childish anthropomorphism. The Earth warms and cools in response to physical forces and processes. Scientists understand this. You, on the other hand, are a clueless fool. Did you find that discarded brain of yours yet?


----------



## Big Fitz (Mar 17, 2012)

CrusaderFrank said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > We have melted 40% of the North polar ice cap in the last 50 years.
> ...


Come on.  Be honest.  That's WAY less than a rounding error.


----------



## daveman (Mar 17, 2012)

RollingThunder said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > RollingThunder said:
> ...


See?  Nothing but emotionalism.  Thanks for proving my point.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Mar 17, 2012)

RollingThunder said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > RollingThunder said:
> ...



Running squirt your opinion is not fact. Have you found those discarded data sheets? You know the one the hockey stick one?


----------



## westwall (Mar 17, 2012)

RollingThunder said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > 14 months of weather is not climate.
> ...







If you were as intellectually informed as you claim to be you would know that the current trend began around 1845-1850.  But that would be science....and as we all know you don't do science.  It interferes with your religion.


----------



## RollingThunder (Mar 17, 2012)

westwall said:


> RollingThunder said:
> 
> 
> > daveman said:
> ...



LOLOLOL....oh walleyedretard, why do you always embarrass yourself like this? You're the anti-science cult-nut with nothing but ignorant myths and stupid lies going for you. 

The current trend of rising temperatures did indeed begin around mid 19th century after the first big pulse of fossil carbon was emitted during the industrial revolution. The trend of rising temperatures was unexpectedly interrupted in the 1950's, 60's and 70's and temperatures even declined just slightly. Scientists now know that this pause in global warming was caused by particulate and aerosol pollution from burning coal that blocked the energy from the sun, as well as creating other problems like acid rain. As aerosol and particulate emissions were regulated and reduced in America and Europe and other modern nations, but greenhouse gas pollution continued to increase, the cooling effect of the aerosols and high altitude particluates was overwhelmed by the greenhouse gases, and global warming resumed. This is reflected quite accurately in the analysis of record high temperatures versus record low temperatures in America. In the 1950's, the ratio between record highs and record lows was almost even at about 1.09 to 1. In the 60's and 70's, the ratios were actually opposite with record hot days being outnumbered by record cold days in a ratio of about 0.78 to 1. Then in 80's the decline in solar energy blocking pollution cleared the way for the accelerating trend of rising temperatures to continue. In the last decade, particulate and aerosol pollution from Chinese and Indian coal fired power plants has increased enormously and this pollution has once again somewhat suppressed the rise in temperatures for the last decade. Even with that suppression of the solar gain, temperatures have continued to rise and the decade from 2000 to 2010 ended up being the warmest decade on record and 2010 tied with 2005 as the warmest year on record. As the Chinese and Indians install better pollution control equipment and clean up their emissions from the current coal fired power plants, the resulting slight decrease in Earth's albedo will accelerate the global warming trend that is being steadily driven ever upward by the still rising CO2 levels.


----------



## Big Fitz (Mar 17, 2012)

daveman said:


> RollingThunder said:
> 
> 
> > daveman said:
> ...


It's like a twisted version of a Harlan Ellison novel:

"I Have No Facts, and I Must Scream"


----------



## uscitizen (Mar 17, 2012)

I used my IR thermometer and my records seem to be at room temperature.


----------



## Douger (Mar 17, 2012)

Trakar said:


> skookerasbil said:
> 
> 
> > ...Only 33% Think Most Americans Blame Humans for Global Warming - Rasmussen Reports...
> ...


Simple math tells me 2/3 of uh murkinz are idiots...........quite evident from looking at your (s)election of circus acts hired to run that shithole.


----------



## Roudy (Mar 17, 2012)

Look it up, in 2008 and 2009 we experienced global cooling. Which is why the global warming nutjobs have now changed the name of their hoax to climate change. Yes there is climate change, no, man is not responsible.  The earth goes through these cycles, and, at this time the sun is going through a cooling cycle. There ain't nothing Al Gore, Obama, and the crazy environmentalists can do about it.


----------



## RollingThunder (Mar 17, 2012)

Roudy said:


> Look it up, in 2008 and 2009 we experienced global cooling. Which is why the global warming nutjobs have now changed the name of their hoax to climate change. Yes there is climate change, no, man is not responsible.  The earth goes through these cycles, and, at this time the sun is going through a cooling cycle. There ain't nothing Al Gore, Obama, and the crazy environmentalists can do about it.



You have been misinformed and misled on this subject.

2008 was the 12th warmest year on record for the last 160 years. 2009 was the 7th warmest year. No "_cooling_", you poor deluded dupe. 2010 was tied with 2005 as the warmest year on record. 

Scientists have referred to both global warming and climate change for over three decades. The IPCC, or Intergovernmental Panel on *Climate Change*, was established in *1988*, Mr Retardo. 

Your ignorant opinions on the cause of the current abrupt global warming/climate changes are meaningless. The world's climate scientists, who actually know what they're talking about, are very clear that it is mankind's carbon emissions and deforestation practices that are driving this warming trend that is causing the climate changes. 

The Earth's climate does go through long slow natural cycles but what is happening now is beyond the bounds of natural variability and is not part of any natural cycle. 

And finally, you're wrong again, retard, the sun has entered a solar maximum period that is expected to peak in 2013. You're obviously a clueless idiot.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Mar 17, 2012)

RollingThunder said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Look it up, in 2008 and 2009 we experienced global cooling. Which is why the global warming nutjobs have now changed the name of their hoax to climate change. Yes there is climate change, no, man is not responsible.  The earth goes through these cycles, and, at this time the sun is going through a cooling cycle. There ain't nothing Al Gore, Obama, and the crazy environmentalists can do about it.
> ...



Let's take a vote on who has been misinformed you or us?


----------



## skookerasbil (Mar 17, 2012)

RollingThunder said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Look it up, in 2008 and 2009 we experienced global cooling. Which is why the global warming nutjobs have now changed the name of their hoax to climate change. Yes there is climate change, no, man is not responsible.  The earth goes through these cycles, and, at this time the sun is going through a cooling cycle. There ain't nothing Al Gore, Obama, and the crazy environmentalists can do about it.
> ...




but still nobody cares except the internet ocd's!!!

When is the last time somebody turned on the boob and saw even a news report about "global warming"?? Doesnt happen. Why? Because the whole world reaches for the remote in 2012. The entire planet, for example, now see's Al Gore as a total joke. WHo cares about him these days? The internet k00ks like Rolling Thunder who eat, sleep and drink alarmist, fringe science.


Shit......even a large majoirty of meteorologists think global warming is a crock, but particularly the man-made crap is a farce.

Shock Poll: Meteorologists Are Global Warming Skeptics - Forbes


Also........almost 70% of Americans think that scientists have falsified global warming research...........

69% Say It



The alarmist contingent are losing in spectacular fashion in 2012. The American people find watching paint dry to be more intersting than global warming in 2012.



Indeed, since 2007, the concerns of the public related to global warming has shifted dramatically and has been falling every since year since. Fucking with all the data certainly hasnt helped.

Fewer Americans See Solid Evidence of Global Warming - Pew Research Center



Can anybody say, "Escalator down??"


----------



## saveliberty (Mar 17, 2012)

Hey Faithers, what is hurricane season going to be like this summer?  Where will droughts occur?  Who will have excess rain?  Where will it be warmer?  Cooler?  Use your model and predict.


----------



## westwall (Mar 17, 2012)

RollingThunder said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > RollingThunder said:
> ...







They KNOW it?  Do tell.  Show us some peer reviewed articles explaining how that occured.


----------



## Old Rocks (Mar 17, 2012)

climate code red: Faustian bargain revisited: study finds zeroed emissions will add 0.25-0.5C of warming as aerosol cooling is lost

12 March 2012


Faustian bargain revisited: study finds zeroed emissions will add 0.25-0.5C of warming as aerosol cooling is lost

NASA climate science chief James Hansen&#8217;s description of the aerosol dilemma as a &#8220;Faustian bargain&#8221; has been dramatically illustrated in a new scientific paper by Damon Matthews and Kirsten Zickfeld and published in Nature on 4 March 2012. As we previously discussed in Beyond the carbon price, a Faustian bargain:     

Human activity modifies the impact of the greenhouse effect by the release of airborne particulate pollutants known as aerosols. These include black-carbon soot, organic carbon, sulphates, nitrates, as well as dust from smoke, manufacturing, wind storms, and other sources. Aerosols have a net cooling effect because they reduce the amount of sunlight that reaches the ground and they increase cloud cover. This is popularly known as "global dimming", because the overall aerosol impact is to mask some of the warming effect of greenhouse gases. Aerosols are washed out of the atmosphere by rain on average every 10 days, so their cooling effect is only maintained because of continuing human pollution, the principal source of which is the burning of fossil fuels, which also cause a rise in carbon dioxide levels and global warming that lasts for many centuries. 

Now, in &#8220;Climate response to zeroed emissions of greenhouse gases and aerosols&#8221;, Matthews and Zickfeld show that when aerosols and other greenhouse-gas emissions, as well as carbon dioxide,  are eliminated from the atmosphere [their modeling assumes all at once, in the year 2010] to "zeroed emissions":


----------



## Old Rocks (Mar 17, 2012)

http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nclimate1424.html

Climate response to zeroed emissions of greenhouse gases and aerosols
H. Damon Matthews
& Kirsten Zickfeld
Affiliations
Contributions
Corresponding author
 Nature Climate Change(2012)doi:10.1038/nclimate1424Received 29 September 2011 Accepted 30 January 2012 Published online 04 March 2012 


The climate response to scenarios of zero future greenhouse-gas emissions can be interpreted as the committed future warming associated with past emissions, and represents a critical benchmark against which to estimate the effect of future emissions1, 2. Recent climate-model simulations have shown that when emissions of carbon dioxide alone are eliminated, global temperature stabilizes and remains approximately constant for several centuries2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8. Here, we show that when aerosol and other greenhouse-gas emissions are also eliminated, global temperature increases by a few tenths of a degree over about a decade, as a result of the rapid removal of present-day aerosol forcing. This initial warming is followed by a gradual cooling that returns global temperature to present-day levels after several centuries, owing to the decline in non-carbon dioxide greenhouse-gas concentrations. We show further that the magnitude of the peak temperature response to zero future emissions depends strongly on the uncertain strength of present-day aerosol forcing. Contingent on the climate and carbon-cycle sensitivities of the model used here, we show that the range of aerosol forcing that produces historical warming that is consistent with observed data, results in a warming of between 0.25 and 0.5&#8201;°C over the decade immediately following zeroed emissions


----------



## westwall (Mar 17, 2012)

Old Rocks said:


> climate code red: Faustian bargain revisited: study finds zeroed emissions will add 0.25-0.5C of warming as aerosol cooling is lost
> 
> 12 March 2012
> 
> ...







Oh please.  Give me some real fucking scientific work.  Not this modelling horseshit that has been proven to be worthless.  Thes clowns can make their models do anything they want.  They are not science...they are science FICTION!

"their modeling assumes all at once, in the year 2010"


----------



## daveman (Mar 17, 2012)

Big Fitz said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > RollingThunder said:
> ...





Wait -- us conservatives hate science.  What are we doing reading science fiction?

If you want to not read the science fiction story, it's not online here:  I Have No Mouth, and I Must Scream

I loved that story when I first didn't read it as a kid.


----------



## daveman (Mar 17, 2012)

RollingThunder said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Look it up, in 2008 and 2009 we experienced global cooling. Which is why the global warming nutjobs have now changed the name of their hoax to climate change. Yes there is climate change, no, man is not responsible.  The earth goes through these cycles, and, at this time the sun is going through a cooling cycle. There ain't nothing Al Gore, Obama, and the crazy environmentalists can do about it.
> ...


You forgot to tell him that global socialism is the only thing that can save us.


----------



## daveman (Mar 17, 2012)

westwall said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> > climate code red: Faustian bargain revisited: study finds zeroed emissions will add 0.25-0.5C of warming as aerosol cooling is lost
> ...


And when the data do not fit the model, they do not change the model as demanded by real science.

They change the data.  As demanded by their political agenda.


----------



## RollingThunder (Mar 17, 2012)

westwall said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> > climate code red: Faustian bargain revisited: study finds zeroed emissions will add 0.25-0.5C of warming as aerosol cooling is lost
> ...



Oh please.  You anti-science denier cult retards couldn't/wouldn't recognize "_real fucking scientific work_" if it bit you. You're all uneducated morons severely afflicted by the Dunning-Kruger Effect.


----------



## westwall (Mar 18, 2012)

RollingThunder said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > Old Rocks said:
> ...








When did you earn your PhD in a hard science buckwheat?  I earned mine way back in the '70's at Caltech.  What do you have?  A GED?


----------



## RollingThunder (Mar 18, 2012)

westwall said:


> RollingThunder said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...



LOLOL....the only "_PhD_" associated with you, walleyed, stands for 'piled higher and deeper".

You've demonstrated conclusively many times on this forum that you don't know your ass from a hole in the ground, particularly in any area of science.


----------



## Old Rocks (Mar 18, 2012)

westwall said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> > climate code red: Faustian bargain revisited: study finds zeroed emissions will add 0.25-0.5C of warming as aerosol cooling is lost
> ...



Knowing that you don't read Nature, you should know that it is a peer reviewed scientific journal. You asked for a real scientific article, you got one. The fact that you wish to deny what real scientists have to say is just the norm for you.


----------



## skookerasbil (Mar 18, 2012)

laugh...........my.............balls............off......................

Alaska about to set ALL TIME snowfall record!!!

News from The Associated Press


----------



## Big Fitz (Mar 18, 2012)

daveman said:


> Big Fitz said:
> 
> 
> > daveman said:
> ...


Some of us read SF for entertainment.

Ecofascists try to live it for power.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Mar 18, 2012)

they need a board in the Conspiracy  theory section  for chris and his warmer post's. I really don't understand why any mention of obama's BC or anything dealing with his past life get's moved there but the global warming bullshit doesn't?


----------



## daveman (Mar 18, 2012)

Big Fitz said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Big Fitz said:
> ...


Of course.  They're victims of Magical Thinking.


----------



## RollingThunder (Mar 18, 2012)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> they need a board in the Conspiracy  theory section  for chris and his warmer post's. I really don't understand why any mention of obama's BC or anything dealing with his past life get's moved there but the global warming bullshit doesn't?



Given how severely retarded you obviously are, it is not too surprising that you "_really don't understand_" why your idiotic political fantasies and conspiracy theories aren't in the same category as the scientifically established reality of anthropogenic global warming/climate changes. You're just too stupid, ignorant and poorly educated to tell the difference between bullshit and reality.


----------



## Meister (Mar 18, 2012)

RollingThunder said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > they need a board in the Conspiracy  theory section  for chris and his warmer post's. I really don't understand why any mention of obama's BC or anything dealing with his past life get's moved there but the global warming bullshit doesn't?
> ...



Running on emotion?


----------



## RollingThunder (Mar 18, 2012)

Meister said:


> RollingThunder said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



Reading the moronic bullshit posted by retards like you, I'm actually "_running_" on a mixture of disgust, horror, pity, amusement and despair over our obviously failed system of education that could produce cretins like you. 

You, of course and as usual, are running on raw stupidity and massive ignorance.


----------



## Meister (Mar 18, 2012)

RollingThunder said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> > RollingThunder said:
> ...



So it is emotion, huh?


----------



## elvis (Mar 18, 2012)

RollingThunder said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> > RollingThunder said:
> ...


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ymbNKQWYKRM]Aerosmith - Sweet Emotion - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## RollingThunder (Mar 18, 2012)

Meister said:


> RollingThunder said:
> 
> 
> > Meister said:
> ...



You might call it that. Sane people call it "the facts".


----------



## Meister (Mar 18, 2012)

RollingThunder said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> > RollingThunder said:
> ...



Lashing out as you do shows nothing more than emotion, rollingthunder.
make no mistake about that.


----------



## Ropey (Mar 18, 2012)

Meister said:


> RollingThunder said:
> 
> 
> > Meister said:
> ...









And it's not a mushroom cloud.


----------



## Dabs (Mar 18, 2012)

87 degrees here today....been this way for a week!
Of course, we have been having severe storms too.....but I can wear shorts now *YaY*


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Mar 18, 2012)

RollingThunder said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > they need a board in the Conspiracy  theory section  for chris and his warmer post's. I really don't understand why any mention of obama's BC or anything dealing with his past life get's moved there but the global warming bullshit doesn't?
> ...



Only a retard would fall trap to the global warming Conspiracy  theory. You are just a tool got it stooge?


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Mar 18, 2012)

RollingThunder said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> > RollingThunder said:
> ...



Hey retard tell me why was the earths temperature hotter in the 1300's than it is now?


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Mar 18, 2012)

Meister said:


> RollingThunder said:
> 
> 
> > Meister said:
> ...



Yep someone who's trying to present something as a scientist might, he isn't doing a very good job of it.


----------



## RollingThunder (Mar 18, 2012)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> RollingThunder said:
> 
> 
> > Meister said:
> ...



It wasn't, you poor confused and bamboozled fool.

Not that it would make any difference whatsoever to the scientifically established links between mankind's carbon emissions and the current abrupt global warming trend, even if the MWP had been globally warmer than present temperatures. Scientists understand the natural forces that have produced climate variations in the past and they can tell the difference between what has happened before and what is happening now. It is just the ignorant retards like you who are in the dark about it all.


----------



## saveliberty (Mar 18, 2012)

There's the thing.  Earth has cycles and IF man had any real influence, the cycle would just speed up.  The Earth woudl respond and we would just start cooling.  Man cannot change the cycle by adding CO2.  The Earth has far too many ways to cope.


----------



## RollingThunder (Mar 18, 2012)

saveliberty said:


> There's the thing.  Earth has cycles and IF man had any real influence, the cycle would just speed up.  The Earth woudl respond and we would just start cooling.  Man cannot change the cycle by adding CO2.  The Earth has far too many ways to cope.



Here's the thing. You have no idea what you're talking about. You're an ignorant, uneducated fool spewing nonsense about things beyond your obviously limited comprehension.


----------



## saveliberty (Mar 18, 2012)

Really?  I can account for far more than you about climate.  How did the predicitons go for you?  Able to tell me how many hurricanes are coming this eyar and how bad they will be?  Where will there be drought?  High temps?  Excessive rains?  Surely you will have no problem with your climate model.


----------



## Meister (Mar 18, 2012)

RollingThunder said:


> saveliberty said:
> 
> 
> > There's the thing.  Earth has cycles and IF man had any real influence, the cycle would just speed up.  The Earth woudl respond and we would just start cooling.  Man cannot change the cycle by adding CO2.  The Earth has far too many ways to cope.
> ...



Here's the thing. You have no idea what you're talking about. You're an ignorant, uneducated fool spewing nonsense about things beyond your obviously limited comprehension.


----------



## westwall (Mar 18, 2012)

RollingThunder said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > RollingThunder said:
> ...







Yes it was you anti scientific troll.






Medieval Warm Period


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Mar 18, 2012)

RollingThunder said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > RollingThunder said:
> ...



You're lying
The idea of &#8203;&#8203;a medieval warm period was in 1965 by the British climatologist Hubert H. Lamb for the first time formulated in [1]. Lamb, in 1971 the UK Climate Research Unit ( CRU founded) saw the culmination of the hot time between 1000 and 1300, ie in the high Middle Ages. He estimated that the temperatures at the time of 1-2 ° C above those of the normal period 1931-1960 were. In the far north, it was even up to 4 degrees warmer. The regular trips between Iceland and Greenland the Vikings were barely hindered by ice, and many burial places of the Vikings in Greenland are still in the permafrost.
Google Übersetzer


----------



## Roudy (Mar 18, 2012)

RollingThunder said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > Look it up, in 2008 and 2009 we experienced global cooling. Which is why the global warming nutjobs have now changed the name of their hoax to climate change. Yes there is climate change, no, man is not responsible.  The earth goes through these cycles, and, at this time the sun is going through a cooling cycle. There ain't nothing Al Gore, Obama, and the crazy environmentalists can do about it.
> ...



We had a period of cooling down. 08 and 09 were comparatively cold years. The sun is going though a cooling cycle. Why do you think the name Global Warming has changed to Climate Change?  Two years in a row of egg in the face of the Global Warming crowd. Didn't you hear about it last year how they got their hands caught in the cookie jar, it was discovered that they had skewed the results to match their theory of the earth warming?  Are you aware that Europe as we speak is going through some of the coldest temps in 50 years?  What I find interesting is as soon as we have a hot season, the kooks come out of the closet to alert the whole world that the end is near, but when there is record cold temps or snowfall, they simply deflect saying that it is all part of "Global Warming" and Climate Change. You can't have it both ways. 

And besides, we are far from proving that man has anything to do with anything. I think the sun cooling or warming kind of overrides what environmental Wackjob conspiracists think.


----------



## RollingThunder (Mar 19, 2012)

Roudy said:


> RollingThunder said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...



Repeating your delusional drivel over and over won't make it any less insane, you poor misinformed stooge.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Mar 19, 2012)

RollingThunder said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > RollingThunder said:
> ...



Coldest winter in 1,000 years on its way &mdash; RT


----------



## RollingThunder (Mar 19, 2012)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> RollingThunder said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...



A two year old article about a winter that wasn't anywhere near to being "_the coldest in a thousand years_" after all. Wow, are you retarded or what?

Cold winters in Europe are being caused by the melting of the Arctic ice cap due to global warming. The open waters are warmer than the ice cover would be and this creates a persistent high pressure area in the atmosphere that diverts the jet stream and spills frigid Arctic air into Europe.

*Cold winters in Europe caused by less summer sea ice*
6 February 2012
(excerpts)
*In fact, science has predicted that cold weather, especially in Eastern Europe during winter, is likely to be intensified by the lack of summer sea ice over the Arctic. Scientists at the Alfred Wegener Institute for Polar and Marine Research have shown yet again, that global warming is a complex process and that warming in one region may lead to cooling in others, despite an overall warming trend.

The loss of sea ice in the Arctic leads to two important effects: the retreat of lighter coloured ice in favour of darker ocean, which in turn causes warming of the ocean. Secondly, the lid effect of the ice cap is removed, causing the warmer ocean to heat the atmosphere. This warming effect has been clearly measured and causes a rising air mass over the arctic, which in turn influences normal circulations in the region. The air pressure difference between the Arctic and the mid-latitudes can therefore be reduced, lessening Atlantic westerlys and letting the arctic air push south into Europe.*


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Mar 19, 2012)

RollingThunder said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > RollingThunder said:
> ...


Dude I posted that earlier. It was a stupid concept then  and it's stupid now. melting arctic ice causing more snow? Are you that stupid to believe that idiocy?


----------



## RollingThunder (Mar 19, 2012)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> RollingThunder said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



The "_concept_" is scientifically sound. You are just too stupid, ignorant, poorly educated and brainwashed to either acknowledge or understand the science.

BTW, how did that "_2010 winter will be the coldest in a thousand years_" thing turn out for you? LOL.


----------



## saveliberty (Mar 19, 2012)

...or it could just be jet stream shifts caused by ocean current shifts, like always.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Mar 19, 2012)

RollingThunder said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > RollingThunder said:
> ...



Better tighten down on that tin foil hat.


----------



## RollingThunder (Mar 19, 2012)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> RollingThunder said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



Typically meaningless retard response when the topic is beyond your comprehension.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Mar 19, 2012)

RollingThunder said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > RollingThunder said:
> ...



You didn't tighten that tin foil hat did you? The earth is melting....... You and your conspiracy are so full of shit that must be were all the toxic CO2 gases are coming from.

Oh and by the way CO2 is a needed gas to maintain a healthy planet.


----------



## RollingThunder (Mar 19, 2012)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> RollingThunder said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



You poor deluded retard! Water is necessary to maintain a healthy body but try drinking 10 gallons at once or completely submerging yourself in it for half an hour with no air supply. Too much of a 'good thing' can indeed be a very bad thing.


----------



## westwall (Mar 19, 2012)

RollingThunder said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > RollingThunder said:
> ...







The "concept" is ridiculous on its face.  If we lived in a sealed system like a refrigerator it would have merit.  Seeings how we don't, it is just another example of the warmists taking both sides of every issue to cover their now freezing asses.


----------



## westwall (Mar 19, 2012)

saveliberty said:


> ...or it could just be jet stream shifts caused by ocean current shifts, like always.







Naaaaahh, that's too logical and scientifically sound.  Can't have that.


----------



## westwall (Mar 19, 2012)

RollingThunder said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > RollingThunder said:
> ...







Funny how you morons can never argue without bringing up ridiculous extreme arguments.
That's all you have ridiculous claims and high powered emotion.  But, no science to back it up.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Mar 19, 2012)

westwall said:


> RollingThunder said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



Exactly, first it was a new ice age back in the 70's then it was global warming, and when they missed it they changed to climate change, now it's melting arctic ice causing a lot of snow. What's wrong with snow? Isn't snow another form of rain?


----------



## Sunshine (Mar 19, 2012)

Supposed to be 84F here tomorrow!  This weather really does play heck with that little 'no wearing white before easter' gig!~


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Mar 19, 2012)

Sunshine said:


> Supposed to be 84F here tomorrow!  This weather really does play heck with that little 'no wearing white before easter' gig!~



Be an extremist wear something white. 

Preferably a white tight fitting T-shirt and tight pair of Jeans


----------



## RollingThunder (Mar 19, 2012)

westwall said:


> RollingThunder said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



A lot of things that are quite true may seem "_ridiculous_" to ignorant retards like you. Global warming has caused more evaporation from the ocean which has raised worldwide average water vapor levels by about 4%. This extra water in the air is responsible for the increased rain and snowfalls. The melting of the Arctic ice has exposed vast areas of the ocean surface which, being much darker than the former ice cover, absorbs most of the sun's energy and further warms the water. The already warmer ocean waters warm the air and cause changes in atmospheric circulation patterns that result in more Arctic air moving down into Europe. People who are at least a thousand times smarter than you have studied this and have the evidence to support their findings. You have only your own ignorance and stupidity going for you.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Mar 19, 2012)

RollingThunder said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > RollingThunder said:
> ...



Dude when water evaporates where in the hell do you think it goes?


----------



## saveliberty (Mar 19, 2012)

RollingThunder said:


> A lot of things that are quite true may seem "_ridiculous_" to ignorant retards like you. Global warming has caused more evaporation from the ocean which has raised worldwide average water vapor levels by about 4%. This extra water in the air is responsible for the increased rain and snowfalls. The melting of the Arctic ice has exposed vast areas of the ocean surface which, being much darker than the former ice cover, absorbs most of the sun's energy and further warms the water. The already warmer ocean waters warm the air and cause changes in atmospheric circulation patterns that result in more Arctic air moving down into Europe. People who are at least a thousand times smarter than you have studied this and have the evidence to support their findings. You have only your own ignorance and stupidity going for you.



None of this is caused by humans RT.  Been working that way for millions of years.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Mar 19, 2012)

Concern that the Arctic Ocean is becoming massively less salty due to its ice cap melting - which could have knock-on consequences for the planet's climate - is unfounded, NASA scientists have said.
Arctic freshening not due to ice melt after all, says NASA ? The Register

There is a continent about the size of Australia underneath all this ice; the ice sheet sitting on top averages at a little over 2 kilometer (1.2 miles) thick. If all of this ice melted, it would raise global sea level by about 60 meter (197 feet). But little, if any, surface warming is occurring over East Antarctica.

NASA - Is Antarctica Melting?


----------



## saveliberty (Mar 19, 2012)

By God we will drown if Faithers tell us to!


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Mar 19, 2012)

saveliberty said:


> By God we will drown if Faithers tell us to!



save the polar bear


----------



## RollingThunder (Mar 19, 2012)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> RollingThunder said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...



It goes into the atmosphere and falls out again as rain and snow. 

In your little retardo world, where do you imagine it goes?


----------



## RollingThunder (Mar 19, 2012)

saveliberty said:


> RollingThunder said:
> 
> 
> > A lot of things that are quite true may seem "_ridiculous_" to ignorant retards like you. Global warming has caused more evaporation from the ocean which has raised worldwide average water vapor levels by about 4%. This extra water in the air is responsible for the increased rain and snowfalls. The melting of the Arctic ice has exposed vast areas of the ocean surface which, being much darker than the former ice cover, absorbs most of the sun's energy and further warms the water. The already warmer ocean waters warm the air and cause changes in atmospheric circulation patterns that result in more Arctic air moving down into Europe. People who are at least a thousand times smarter than you have studied this and have the evidence to support their findings. You have only your own ignorance and stupidity going for you.
> ...



That's your retarded denier cult myth but it has nothing to do with the scientific reality of our situation.


----------



## saveliberty (Mar 19, 2012)

RollingThunder said:


> saveliberty said:
> 
> 
> > RollingThunder said:
> ...



Climate cycles have been going on for millions of years before people.  Again, for the third time, use your "scientific theory" to predict hurricane strengths for 2012, where it will be cooler or warmer this year, changes in precipitation patterns.  A good theory predicts results which are then shown to be true or false.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Mar 19, 2012)

RollingThunder said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > RollingThunder said:
> ...


Are you also calling NASA retarded?


bigrebnc1775 said:


> Concern that the Arctic Ocean is becoming massively less salty due to its ice cap melting - which could have knock-on consequences for the planet's climate - is unfounded, NASA scientists have said.
> Arctic freshening not due to ice melt after all, says NASA ? The Register
> 
> There is a continent about the size of Australia underneath all this ice; the ice sheet sitting on top averages at a little over 2 kilometer (1.2 miles) thick. If all of this ice melted, it would raise global sea level by about 60 meter (197 feet). But little, if any, surface warming is occurring over East Antarctica.
> ...


----------



## Sunshine (Mar 19, 2012)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Sunshine said:
> 
> 
> > Supposed to be 84F here tomorrow!  This weather really does play heck with that little 'no wearing white before easter' gig!~
> ...



LOL!  Working in psychiatry that is the LAST thing I would wear!


----------



## RollingThunder (Mar 19, 2012)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Concern that the Arctic Ocean is becoming massively less salty due to its ice cap melting - which could have knock-on consequences for the planet's climate - is unfounded, NASA scientists have said.
> Arctic freshening not due to ice melt after all, says NASA ? The Register


Good lord, bigshthd, are you so retarded that you imagine that this factoid has anything to do with the topic? LOL. 

We talking about the disappearance of *millions of square kilometers* of Arctic ice cover over the last 30 years or so. Changes in the salinity of the ocean waters has nothing to do with that or with the changes in atmospheric circulation that is producing the cold waves in Europe.

In September of 2011, when Arctic sea ice is at its minimum, the ice cover was 2.38 million square kilometers (919,000 square miles) below the 1979 to 2000 average minimum. The minimum ice extent in 2011 was very close to 2007, the lowest ice extent on record, and indeed some other research groups place 2011 as the lowest on record. The National Snow and Ice Data Center regards the 2011 minimum as a close second to the record 2007 minimum. 









bigrebnc1775 said:


> There is a continent about the size of Australia underneath all this ice; the ice sheet sitting on top averages at a little over 2 kilometer (1.2 miles) thick. If all of this ice melted, it would raise global sea level by about 60 meter (197 feet). But little, if any, surface warming is occurring over East Antarctica.
> 
> NASA - Is Antarctica Melting?



What does this off topic stuff have to do with either the cold weather in Europe or the increase in record high temperatures in the US, moron. Are you grasping at straws again?

So there is little surface warming over East Antarctica. So what? It is the West Antarctic Ice Sheet that is melting fast and raising sea levels.

From the NASA article you cited:

*The continent of Antarctica has been losing more than 100 cubic kilometers (24 cubic miles) of ice per year since 2002.*​


----------



## RollingThunder (Mar 19, 2012)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> RollingThunder said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



No, you are, in effect, calling yourself a retard. I just agree with you on that point. As proof of your utter retardedness, none of the stuff from NASA you posted has anything to do with the topic under discussion or what happens to water when it evaporates. But you're so retarded, you just toss in irrelevant stuff you are mentally incapable of understanding.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Mar 19, 2012)

RollingThunder said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Concern that the Arctic Ocean is becoming massively less salty due to its ice cap melting - which could have knock-on consequences for the planet's climate - is unfounded, NASA scientists have said.
> ...



How in the hell is a NASA source talking about no melting Arctic ice be an off topic post? OH that's right it doesn't fit your argument.
You are retarded.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Mar 19, 2012)

RollingThunder said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > RollingThunder said:
> ...





> I just agree with you on that point.


You are a dumb son of a bitch  you did not even agree with NASA. AND HERE YOU SAY YOU AGREED WITH ME? YOU DIDN'T FUCKING LIAR.


----------



## RollingThunder (Mar 19, 2012)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> RollingThunder said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



Thanks for continuing to offer more proof of your complete retardedness, bigshthd. LOLOLOL. It is hilarious that you imagine that "_a NASA source is talking about no melting Arctic ice_". It takes an utter retard to read that so wrong. What NASA is actually saying there is that so far there has been no big decrease in Arctic ocean salinity due to the melting ice.

Were you born this stupid or did you have to smoke meth or something to get like this?


----------



## RollingThunder (Mar 19, 2012)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> RollingThunder said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL.....you are tooooo stupid to bother with. I agree with NASA. You can't understand NASA. I said I agreed with you on you being a complete retard, retard.

"No, you are, in effect, calling yourself a retard. I just agree with you on that point."


----------



## saveliberty (Mar 19, 2012)

RollingThunder said:


> No, you are, in effect, calling yourself a retard. I just agree with you on that point. As proof of your utter retardedness, none of the stuff from NASA you posted has anything to do with the topic under discussion or *what happens to water when it evaporates*. But you're so retarded, you just toss in irrelevant stuff you are mentally incapable of understanding.



We going to drown in water vapor dumbass?


----------



## percysunshine (Mar 19, 2012)

In a few billion years the sun will supernova and nobody will give a shit about the earths climate after that.


----------



## RollingThunder (Mar 19, 2012)

saveliberty said:


> RollingThunder said:
> 
> 
> > No, you are, in effect, calling yourself a retard. I just agree with you on that point. As proof of your utter retardedness, none of the stuff from NASA you posted has anything to do with the topic under discussion or *what happens to water when it evaporates*. But you're so retarded, you just toss in irrelevant stuff you are mentally incapable of understanding.
> ...



It wouldn't make any difference to you since you are quite obviously already braindead.


----------



## RollingThunder (Mar 19, 2012)

percysunshine said:


> In a few billion years the sun will supernova and nobody will give a shit about the earths climate after that.



Wow, only a few billion years. Why don't you just hold your breath until then. Please start now.


----------



## saveliberty (Mar 19, 2012)

RollingThunder said:


> saveliberty said:
> 
> 
> > RollingThunder said:
> ...



Best you had at the moment, or did you have to ponder it for a while?  You were caught in stupid.  Good luck pulling yourself out.  You Faithers have this problem a lot.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Mar 19, 2012)

RollingThunder said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > RollingThunder said:
> ...



What the fuck dude now you're saying the arctic ice isn't melting? After all that was what NASA was saying or are you to damn stupid to understand that part?


----------



## percysunshine (Mar 19, 2012)

RollingThunder said:


> percysunshine said:
> 
> 
> > In a few billion years the sun will supernova and nobody will give a shit about the earths climate after that.
> ...



People are insignificant life forms on the planet. They have only miniscule fleeting effects on the environment. Most environmental concerns are pompus exercises in ego gratification.


----------



## Old Rocks (Mar 19, 2012)

Record Events for Mon Mar 12, 2012 through Sun Mar 18, 2012



Total Records:

2280



Rainfall:

266



Snowfall:

40



High Temperatures:

1192



Low Temperatures:

8



Lowest Max Temperatures:

66



Highest Min Temperatures:

708


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Mar 19, 2012)

Old Rocks said:


> Record Events for Mon Mar 12, 2012 through Sun Mar 18, 2012
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Thanks for the PSA about weather


----------



## saveliberty (Mar 19, 2012)

Old Rocks said:


> Record Events for Mon Mar 12, 2012 through Sun Mar 18, 2012
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Man's influence:

zippo


----------



## RollingThunder (Mar 19, 2012)

percysunshine said:


> RollingThunder said:
> 
> 
> > percysunshine said:
> ...



Well, that's your retarded and rather insane take on the situation but it stems from having your head wedged so firmly up your bleeding ass, you utter moron.


----------



## saveliberty (Mar 19, 2012)

We can no more change climate than stop the rotation of the Earth.


----------



## percysunshine (Mar 19, 2012)

RollingThunder said:


> percysunshine said:
> 
> 
> > RollingThunder said:
> ...



The earth does not even notice people. Continents emerge and disappear. One day Chicago is a sauna, and then it is under 3000' of ice. People running lawn mowers did not bury Chicago under 3000' feet of ice.

Face it, you and I are an insignificant trivial pimple on the history of the planetary environment. The fish and insects will never know we existed at all, and they will never contemplate the clueless egos of the progressive.


----------



## saveliberty (Mar 19, 2012)

percysunshine said:


> The earth does not even notice people. Continents emerge and disappear. One day Chicago is a sauna, and then it is under 3000' of ice. People running lawn mowers did not bury Chicago under 3000' feet of ice.
> 
> Face it, you and I are an insignificant trivial pimple on the history of the planetary environment. The fish and insects will never know we existed at all, and they will never contemplate the clueless egos of the progressive.



I don't know percy, I've had my share of McFish sandwiches and swatted many a mosquito.


----------



## westwall (Mar 19, 2012)

RollingThunder said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > RollingThunder said:
> ...







Yeah, how exactly does that work there buckwheat?  The residence time of water vapor is less than 15 days.  How does it stick around long enough to turn to snow when it gets REALLY FUCKING COLD?  You see pinhead, if it were truly waqrm and we had a lot more water vapor and it was warm then we would have weather like you see at the equator.  Lots of mild rain showers every day.

We don't.  we see powerful storms and that takes the interaction between warm air masses and COLD AIR MASSES dumb ass.  If you were half as smart as you think you were you'd take a meteorology class so you wouldn't make such a damned fool out of yourself.

I guess you're not that smart.........huh.


----------



## westwall (Mar 19, 2012)

RollingThunder said:


> saveliberty said:
> 
> 
> > RollingThunder said:
> ...





Quite the opposite.  Occams Razor my boy, Occams Razor.


----------



## westwall (Mar 19, 2012)

Old Rocks said:


> Record Events for Mon Mar 12, 2012 through Sun Mar 18, 2012
> 
> 
> 
> ...








Big deal.  If I were able to site the weather stations where they should be most of those "records" would be the other way.


----------



## RollingThunder (Mar 20, 2012)

percysunshine said:


> RollingThunder said:
> 
> 
> > percysunshine said:
> ...


Ah, you're confusing your yourself with 'people'. Humans are actually a quite significant force on Earth at this point. It is just you that is insignificant. But that 's mostly because you're a flaming retard. 




percysunshine said:


> They have only miniscule(sic) fleeting effects on the environment.


You have only a minuscule fleeting hint of intelligence. You seem to be too retarded to distinguish between geological time scales and human time scales or to understand the difference.




percysunshine said:


> Most environmental concerns are pompus(sic) exercises in ego gratification.


Most environmental concerns are obviously beyond your very limited comprehension or ability to grasp the significance. You're just projecting your own moronic motivations onto people who are many times better educated and intelligent than you are, you poor brainwashed delusional retard.


----------



## Roudy (Mar 20, 2012)

RollingThunder said:


> Roudy said:
> 
> 
> > RollingThunder said:
> ...



 I'm not making this up. The sun is going through a cooling cycle, and it has surprised many scientists.  This could last another 20 years.  Various areas in the oceans previously warm are now much colder and therefore threatening to the warm water habitat.  Sea life previosuly exclusive to very cold waters is making its way to places off the coast of Florida due to drops in oceans temps  That's why they scrambled to change the phrase global warming to climate change as of 08 / 09.  Of course the media won't even bring all this up and they are hush hush about it, they don't call it global warming any longer. Ask yourself why that is, and follow the money, it will lead you to environmental nutjobs and their croonies that have institutions built to milk govt.'s, based on a lie. 

While reaearching , you do need to be a little objective in order to accept the truth, however.


----------



## RollingThunder (Mar 20, 2012)

westwall said:


> RollingThunder said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...


LOLOLOL. And then what happens, walleyed? After 15 days does all of the water vapor in the Earth's atmosphere just condense and leave the air bone dry everywhere? LOLOL. You are such a clueless retard. 

The water content of the atmosphere as a whole is being constantly replenished by evaporation, mostly from the oceans, seas, lakes, rivers, and moist earth, plus a few other geological and biological processes.  At the same time atmospheric water vapor is constantly being depleted by precipitation as rainfall and snowfall. The total amount of water vapor in the atmosphere is constrained by the restrictions of partial pressures and temperature and stays about the same in the atmosphere as a whole. Warmer air can hold more water vapor (which, BTW moron, doesn't mean cold air holds no water vapor, just slightly less) so with the global increase in temperatures of about one and a third degrees F., the average water vapor level globally has increased by about 4% over its pre-industrial levels. Cold air has always carried water vapor that falls as snow, it just is carrying a bit more water now so the snowfalls tend to be bigger.










westwall said:


> How does it stick around long enough to turn to snow when it gets REALLY FUCKING COLD?  You see pinhead, if it were truly waqrm and we had a lot more water vapor and it was warm then we would have weather like you see at the equator.  Lots of mild rain showers every day.
> 
> We don't.  we see powerful storms and that takes the interaction between warm air masses and COLD AIR MASSES dumb ass.  If you were half as smart as you think you were you'd take a meteorology class so you wouldn't make such a damned fool out of yourself. I guess you're not that smart.........huh.



Oh walleyed, you poor confused old dufus, everything you post just demonstrates how clueless and stupid you are.

Where did you get the idiotic notion that because global warming has increased the average global temperature, it must be getting warmer everywhere at once? LOL. Such a retard. Of course there are still "_cold air masses_", you dumb shithead. No, the whole world isn't going to be suddenly like the tropics with "_lots of mild rain showers every day_". I guess you have no idea just how incredibly stupid you sound.


----------



## RollingThunder (Mar 20, 2012)

Roudy said:


> RollingThunder said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...


No, you're just ignorant and retarded enough to uncritically swallow some nonsense that someone else made up. It's still just crazy nonsense though. You obviously don't know your ass from a hole in the ground.





Roudy said:


> The sun is going through a cooling cycle, and it has surprised many scientists.


It might surprise them if it was true but it isn't. You're just full of shit. The sun is actually entering the solar maximum period of its cycle and it is expected to peak in mid 2013.

*Solar Storms Building Toward Peak in 2013, NASA Predicts*
09 August 2011
(excerpts)
* Solar flares like the huge one that erupted on the sun early today (Aug. 9) will only become more common as our sun nears its maximum level of activity in 2013, scientists say. Tuesday's flare was the most powerful sun storm since 2006, and was rated an X6.9 on the three-class scale for solar storms (X-Class is strongest, with M-Class in the middle and C-Class being the weakest). Flares such as this one could become the norm soon, though, as our sun's 11-year cycle of magnetic activity ramps up, scientists explained. The sun is just coming out of a lull, and scientists expect the next peak of activity in 2013. The current cycle, called Solar Cycle 24, began in 2008.*





Roudy said:


> This could last another 20 years.


It might appear that way to you but that is only because you have your head jammed so far up your ass. In the real world, solar activity is approaching its peak.





Roudy said:


> Various areas in the oceans previously warm are now much colder and therefore threatening to the warm water habitat.  Sea life previosuly(sic) exclusive to very cold waters is making its way to places off the coast of Florida due to drops in oceans temps


Total fantasy bullshit. No reality to that nonsense whatsoever. Ocean surface temperatures vary somewhat due to a number of factors but they have been almost a full degree Fahrenheit warmer than the twentieth century average during the summer months. 






Roudy said:


> That's why they scrambled to change the phrase global warming to climate change as of 08 / 09.


I already told you once, imbecile, that nobody changed anything. Scientists have used both terms for over 30 years. The Intergovernmental Panel on *Climate Change* was established *in 1988*, you stupid ass.






Roudy said:


> Of course the media won't even bring all this up and they are hush hush about it, they don't call it global warming any longer. Ask yourself why that is, and follow the money, it will lead you to environmental nutjobs and their croonies that have institutions built to milk govt.'s, based on a lie. While reaearching , you do need to be a little objective in order to accept the truth, however.


Your incredibly lame ass conspiracy theories are based only on your own ignorance, gullibility, and extreme mental retardation. Scientists still use the term 'global warming' as well as 'climate change' and a number of other descriptive terms, depending on the context and some differences in precise meaning. Climate changes are resulting from global warming so there is some difference in meaning.


----------



## westwall (Mar 20, 2012)

RollingThunder said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > RollingThunder said:
> ...







Why we get all the delusional nonsense from you junior.  It would be nice if you were capable of arguing the science of what you speak.  Sadly though, you have the intellect of a gnat so you're pretty much useless, save as entertainment.  

I categorize you the same as the trained monkey performing in the circus.

I just wish you were as smart as the monkey.


----------



## RollingThunder (Mar 20, 2012)

westwall said:


> RollingThunder said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...



After every idiotic claim and bit of misinformation you post gets debunked and you're shown up as a clueless retard, this sort of meaningless response is all you've got left, I suppose. Too bad you're such a loser.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Mar 20, 2012)

Roudy said:


> RollingThunder said:
> 
> 
> > Roudy said:
> ...




Here is an interesting read



> Intuitively one may assume the that total solar irradiance would decrease as the number of (optically dark) sunspots increased. However direct satellite measurements of irradiance have shown just the opposite to be the case. This means that more sunspots deliver more energy to the atmosphere, so that global temperatures should rise.


Sunspots and climate

Looks like we are near a record number of sunspots.

Solar Trends: Sunspot Numbers Since 1749 | Climate Charts & Graphs


----------



## IanC (Mar 20, 2012)

The following table lists the highest and lowest temperatures recorded in each state in the United States, in both Fahrenheit and Celsius.

State Record high
Temperature Date Place(s) Record low
Temperature Date Place(s) 
Alabama 114°F / 46°C 01925-09-05September 5, 1925 Centerville -27°F / -33°C 01966-01-30January 30, 1966 New Market 
Alaska 100°F / 38°C 01915-06-27June 27, 1915 Fort Yukon -80°F / -62°C 01971-01-23January 23, 1971 Prospect Creek 
Arizona 128°F / 53°C 02007-07-05July 5, 2007* Lake Havasu City -40°F / -40°C 01971-01-07 January 7, 1971 Hawley Lake 
Arkansas 120°F / 49°C 01936-08-10August 10, 1936 Ozark -29°F / -34°C 01905-02-13February 13, 1905 Pond 
California 134°F / 57°C 01913-07-10July 10, 1913 Death Valley -45°F / -43°C 01937-01-20January 20, 1937 Boca 
Colorado 118°F / 48°C 01888-07-11July 11, 1888 Bennett -61°F / -52°C 01985-02-01February 1, 1985 Maybell 
Connecticut 106°F / 41°C 01995-07-15July 15, 1995 Danbury -32°F / -36°C 01943-02-16February 16, 1943* Falls Village 
Delaware 110°F / 43°C 01930-07-21July 21, 1930 Millsboro -17°F / -27°C 01893-01-17January 17, 1893 Millsboro 
District of Columbia 106°F / 41°C 01930-07-20July 20, 1930 Washington -15°F / -26°C 01899-02-11February 11, 1899 Washington 
Florida 109°F / 43°C 01931-06-29June 29, 1931 Monticello -02°F / -19°C 01899-02-13February 13, 1899 Tallahassee 
Georgia 112°F / 44°C 01952-07-24July 24, 1952 Greenville -17°F / -27°C 01940-01-27January 27, 1940 Northern Floyd County 
Hawaii 100°F / 38°C 01931-04-27April 27, 1931 Pahala +12°F / -11°C 01979-05-17May 17, 1979 Mauna Kea 
Idaho 118°F / 48°C 01934-07-28July 28, 1934 Orofino -60°F / -51°C 01943-01-18January 18, 1943 Island Park Dam 
Illinois 117°F / 47°C 01954-07-14July 14, 1954 East Saint Louis -36°F / -38°C 01999-01-05January 5, 1999 Congerville 
Indiana 116°F / 47°C 01936-07-14July 14, 1936 Collegeville -36°F / -38°C 01994-01-19January 19, 1994 New Whiteland 
Iowa 118°F / 48°C 01934-07-20July 20, 1934 Keokuk -47°F / -44°C 01996-02-03February 3, 1996* Elkader 
Kansas 121°F / 49°C 01936-07-24July 24, 1936* Alton -40°F / -40°C 01905-02-13February 13, 1905 Lebanon 
Kentucky 114°F / 46°C 01930-07-28July 28, 1930 Greensburg -34°F / -37°C 01963-01-28January 28, 1963 Cynthiana 
Louisiana 114°F / 46°C 01936-08-10August 10, 1936 Plain Dealing -16°F / -27°C 01899-02-13February 13, 1899 Minden 
Maine 105°F / 41°C 01911-07-10July 10, 1911* North Bridgton -50°F / -46°C 02009-01-16January 16, 2009 Big Black River 
Maryland 109°F / 43°C 01936-07-10July 10, 1936* Cumberland, Frederick -40°F / -40°C 01912-01-13January 13, 1912 Oakland 
Massachusetts 107°F / 42°C 01975-08-02August 2, 1975 New Bedford, Chester -35°F / -37°C 01981-01-12January 12, 1981 Chester 
Michigan 112°F / 44°C 01936-07-13July 13, 1936 Mio -51°F / -46°C 01934-02-09February 9, 1934 Vanderbilt 
Minnesota 114°F / 46°C 01936-07-06July 6, 1936* Moorhead -64°F / -53.3°C 01996-02-01February 1996 Embarrass 
Mississippi 115°F / 46°C 01930-07-29July 29, 1930* Holly Springs -19°F / -28°C 01966-01-30January 30, 1966 Corinth 
Missouri 118°F / 48°C 01954-07-14July 14, 1954* Warsaw, Union -40°F / -40°C 01905-02-13February 13, 1905 Warsaw 
Montana 117°F / 47°C 01937-07-05July 5, 1937 Medicine Lake -70°F / -57°C 01954-01-20January 20, 1954 Rogers Pass 
Nebraska 118°F / 48°C 01936-07-24July 24, 1936* Minden -47°F / -44°C 01899-02-12February 12, 1899* Camp Clarke 
Nevada 125°F / 52°C 01994-06-29June 29, 1994* Laughlin -50°F / -46°C 01937-01-08January 8, 1937 San Jacinto 
New Hampshire 106°F / 41°C 01911-07-04July 4, 1911 Nashua -47°F / -44°C 01934-01-29January 29, 1934 Mount Washington 
New Jersey 110°F / 43°C 01936-07-10July 10, 1936 Runyon -34°F / -37°C 01934-01-05January 5, 1934 River Vale 
New Mexico 122°F / 50°C 01994-06-27June 27, 1994 Lakewood -50°F / -46°C 01951-02-01February 1, 1951 Gavilan 
New York 108°F / 42°C 01926-07-22July 22, 1926* Troy -52°F / -46°C 01979-02-18February 18, 1979 Old Forge 
North Carolina 110°F / 43°C 01983-08-21August 21, 1983 Fayetteville -34°F / -37°C 01985-01-21January 21, 1985 Mount Mitchell 
North Dakota 121°F / 49°C 01936-07-06July 6, 1936 Steele -60°F / -51°C 01936-02-15February 15, 1936 Parshall 
Ohio 113°F / 45°C 01934-07-21July 21, 1934* Gallipolis -39°F / -39°C 01899-02-10February 10, 1899 Milligan 
Oklahoma 120°F / 49°C 01994-06-27June 27, 1994* Tipton -31°F / -35°C 02011-02-10February 10, 2011 Nowata 
Oregon 119°F / 48°C 01898-08-10August 10, 1898* Pendleton -54°F / -48°C 01933-02-10February 10, 1933* Seneca 
Pennsylvania 111°F / 44°C 01936-07-10July 10, 1936* Phoenixville -42°F / -41°C 01904-01-05January 5, 1904 Smethport 
Rhode Island 104°F / 40°C 01975-08-02August 2, 1975 Providence -25°F / -32°C 01996-02-05February 5, 1996 Greene 
South Carolina 111°F / 44°C 01954-06-28June 28, 1954* Camden -19°F / -28°C 01985-01-21January 21, 1985 Caesars Head 
South Dakota 120°F / 49°C 02006-07-15July 15, 2006* Usta (near) -58°F / -50°C 01936-02-17February 17, 1936 McIntosh 
Tennessee 113°F / 45°C 01930-08-09August 9, 1930* Perryville -32°F / -36°C 01917-12-30December 30, 1917 Mountain City 
Texas 120°F / 49°C 01994-06-28June 28, 1994* Monahans -23°F / -31°C 01933-02-08February 8, 1933* Seminole 
Utah 117°F / 47°C 01985-07-05July 5, 1985 Saint George -69°F / -56°C 01985-02-01February 1, 1985 Peter Sinks 
Vermont 105°F / 41°C 01911-07-04July 4, 1911 Vernon -50°F / -46°C 01933-12-30December 30, 1933 Bloomfield 
Virginia 110°F / 43°C 01954-07-15July 15, 1954 Balcony Falls -30°F / -34°C 01985-01-22January 22, 1985 Mountain Lake 
Washington 118°F / 48°C 01961-08-05August 5, 1961* Grant County, Ice Harbor Lock and Dam -48°F / -44°C 01968-12-30December 30, 1968 Mazama, Winthrop 
West Virginia 112°F / 44°C 01936-07-10July 10, 1936* Martinsburg -37°F / -38°C 01917-12-30December 30, 1917 Lewisburg 
Wisconsin 114°F / 46°C 01936-07-13July 13, 1936 Wisconsin Dells -55°F / -48°C 01996-02-04February 4, 1996 Couderay 
Wyoming 114°F / 46°C 01900-07-12July 12, 1900 Basin -66°F / -54°C 01933-02-09February 9, 1933 Riverside 

*Also on earlier date or dates in that state




the 30's are massively over-represented. recent times....not so much. of course if you add in Hansen's adjustments then all those hot days just disappear. which is why everyone should take temperature data sets with a large pinch of salt. every new version of every set takes a little more away from the past and adds a little to the recent.


----------



## RollingThunder (Mar 20, 2012)

IanC said:


> The following table lists the highest and lowest temperatures recorded in each state in the United States, in both Fahrenheit and Celsius.
> 
> the 30's are massively over-represented. recent times....not so much. of course if you add in Hansen's adjustments then all those hot days just disappear. which is why everyone should take temperature data sets with a large pinch of salt. every new version of every set takes a little more away from the past and adds a little to the recent.



LOLOLOL......you are sooooo clueless.

"_the highest and lowest temperatures recorded in each state in the United States_" - *completely meaningless* in the context of this debate or in relation to global warming/climate changes.

BTW, retard, climate scientists like Dr Hansen use a broad array of data from all around the world, not single data points isolated by meaningless geographical boundaries, all within a country, the US, that covers only about 2% of the Earth's surface. Your denier cult myths about deliberate errors in climate science are both moronic and insane. You've been duped by the fossil fuel industry's propaganda into believing a lot of idiotic nonsense with no foundation in reality, you poor gullible fool.


----------



## Old Rocks (Mar 20, 2012)

AGW Observer

Arctic amplification may be linked to extreme weather events

Evidence linking Arctic amplification to extreme weather in mid-latitudes &#8211; Francis & Vavrus (2012)

Abstract: &#8220;Arctic amplification (AA) &#8211; the observed enhanced warming in high northern latitudes relative to the northern hemisphere &#8211; is evident in lower-tropospheric temperatures and in 1000-to-500 hPa thicknesses. Daily fields of 500 hPa heights from the National Centers for Environmental Prediction Reanalysis are analyzed over N. America and the N. Atlantic to assess changes in north-south (Rossby) wave characteristics associated with AA and the relaxation of poleward thickness gradients. Two effects are identified that each contribute to a slower eastward progression of Rossby waves in the upper-level flow: 1) weakened zonal winds, and 2) increased wave amplitude. These effects are particularly evident in autumn and winter consistent with sea-ice loss, but are also apparent in summer, possibly related to earlier snow melt on high-latitude land. Slower progression of upper-level waves would cause associated weather patterns in mid-latitudes to be more persistent, which may lead to an increased probability of extreme weather events that result from prolonged conditions, such as drought, flooding, cold spells, and heat waves.&#8221;


----------



## Old Rocks (Mar 20, 2012)

AGW Observer

Global monsoon area increases with global warming

Increase of global monsoon area and precipitation under global warming: A robust signal? &#8211; Hsu et al. (2012)

Abstract: &#8220;Monsoons, the most energetic tropical climate system, exert a great social and economic impact upon billions of people around the world. The global monsoon precipitation had an increasing trend over the past three decades. Whether or not this increasing trend will continue in the 21st century is investigated, based on simulations of three high-resolution atmospheric general circulation models that were forced by different future sea surface temperature (SST) warming patterns. The results show that the global monsoon area, precipitation and intensity all increase consistently among the model projections. This indicates that the strengthened global monsoon is a robust signal across the models and SST patterns explored here. The increase of the global monsoon precipitation is attributed to the increases of moisture convergence and surface evaporation. The former is caused by the increase of atmospheric water vapor and the latter is due to the increase of SST. The effect of the moisture and evaporation increase is offset to a certain extent by the weakening of the monsoon circulation.&#8221;


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Mar 20, 2012)

RollingThunder said:


> IanC said:
> 
> 
> > The following table lists the highest and lowest temperatures recorded in each state in the United States, in both Fahrenheit and Celsius.
> ...


We know your right and science is wrong no matter how many times someone shows you how wrong you are. By the way NASA says to quit lying.


----------



## RollingThunder (Mar 20, 2012)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> RollingThunder said:
> 
> 
> > IanC said:
> ...



The 'science' is 'right' and NASA's right too. You're the one who's ridiculously wrong. You're just a confused and clueless retard blowing smoke out your ass about stuff you can't comprehend. All you've ever shown here is how ignorant and idiotic you are.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Mar 20, 2012)

RollingThunder said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > RollingThunder said:
> ...


NASA said there was no arctic ice melting you said there was.


----------



## Meister (Mar 20, 2012)

You can't refute so you ignore what has been presented by the people that oppose you, so you resort to the name calling?  Really?


----------



## Old Rocks (Mar 20, 2012)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> RollingThunder said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



Really? NASA said that?

Ice Loss in the Canadian Arctic Archipelago : Image of the Day

Though much attention has been focused in recent years on the melting of ice from Greenland and Antarctica, nearly half of the ice volume currently being lost to the ocean is actually coming from other mountain glaciers and ice caps. Ice loss from a group of islands in northern Canada accounts for much of that volume.

In a study published in April 2011 in the journal Nature, a team of researchers led by Alex Gardner of the University of Michigan found that land ice in both the northern and southern Canadian Arctic Archipelago has declined sharply. The maps above show ice loss from surface melting for the northern portion of the archipelago from 20042006 (left) and 20072009 (right). Blue indicates ice gain, and red indicates ice loss.

In the six years studied, the Canadian Arctic Archipelago lost an average of approximately 61 gigatons of ice per year. (A gigaton is a billion tons of ice.) The research team also found the rate of ice loss was accelerating. From 2004 to 2006, the average mass loss was roughly 31 gigatons per year; from 2007 to 2009, the loss increased to 92 gigatons per year. 
Gardner and colleagues used three independent methods to assess ice mass, all of which showed the same trends. The team used a model to estimate the surface mass balance of ice and the amount of ice discharged. They also compiled and analyzed measurements from NASAs Ice, Cloud and Land Elevation Satellite (ICESat) to assess changes in the surface height of ice. Finally, they gathered observations from NASAs Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment (GRACE) to determine changes in the gravity field in the region, an indicator of the amount of ice gained or lost.

The Canadian Arctic Archipelago generally receives little precipitation, and the amount of snowfall changes little from year to year. But the rate of snow and ice melting varies considerably, so changes in ice mass come largely from changes in summertime melt. During the 2004 to 2009 study period, the Canadian Arctic Archipelago experienced four of its five warmest years since 1960, likely fueling the melting.


----------



## Old Rocks (Mar 20, 2012)

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U30m3538CWo]NASA Arctic ice loss video - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## Old Rocks (Mar 20, 2012)

*Wise to post links when you blanket statements like "NASA says no Arctic ice loss.*

NASA - Arctic Sea Ice Continues Decline, Hits 2nd-Lowest Level


----------



## Old Rocks (Mar 20, 2012)

Meister said:


> You can't refute so you ignore what has been presented by the people that oppose you, so you resort to the name calling?  Really?



Just refuted the statement.


----------



## RollingThunder (Mar 20, 2012)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> RollingThunder said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



NASA did not say that, retard. You're just too stupid to understand what you read.

Here's what NASA actually has to say about the Arctic ice.

*Arctic Sea Ice Continues Decline, Hits Second-Lowest Level
NASA*
 Oct. 4, 2011
(govt. publication - free to reproduce)

*WASHINGTON -- Last month the extent of sea ice covering the Arctic Ocean declined to the second-lowest extent on record. Satellite data from NASA and the NASA-supported National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC) at the University of Colorado in Boulder showed that the summertime sea ice cover narrowly avoided a new record low.

The Arctic ice cap grows each winter as the sun sets for several months and shrinks each summer as the sun rises higher in the northern sky. Each year the Arctic sea ice reaches its annual minimum extent in September. It hit a record low in 2007.

The near-record ice-melt followed higher-than-average summer temperatures, but without the unusual weather conditions that contributed to the extreme melt of 2007. "Atmospheric and oceanic conditions were not as conducive to ice loss this year, but the melt still neared 2007 levels," said NSIDC scientist Walt Meier. "This probably reflects loss of multiyear ice in the Beaufort and Chukchi seas as well as other factors that are making the ice more vulnerable."

Joey Comiso, senior scientist at NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Md., said the continued low minimum sea ice levels fits into the large-scale decline pattern that scientists have watched unfold over the past three decades.

"The sea ice is not only declining, the pace of the decline is becoming more drastic," Comiso said. "The older, thicker ice is declining faster than the rest, making for a more vulnerable perennial ice cover."

While the sea ice extent did not dip below the 2007 record, the sea ice area as measured by the microwave radiometer on NASA's Aqua satellite did drop slightly lower than 2007 levels for about 10 days in early September, Comiso said. Sea ice "area" differs from extent in that it equals the actual surface area covered by ice, while extent includes any area where ice covers at least 15 percent of the ocean.

Arctic sea ice extent on Sept. 9, the lowest point this year, was 4.33 million square kilometers (1.67 million square miles). Averaged over the month of September, ice extent was 4.61 million square kilometers (1.78 million square miles). This places 2011 as the second lowest ice extent both for the daily minimum extent and the monthly average. Ice extent was 2.43 million square kilometers (938,000 square miles) below the 1979 to 2000 average.

This summer's low ice extent continued the downward trend seen over the last 30 years, which scientists attribute largely to warming temperatures caused by climate change. Data show that Arctic sea ice has been declining both in extent and thickness. Since 1979, September Arctic sea ice extent has declined by 12 percent per decade.

"The oldest and thickest ice in the Arctic continues to decline, especially in the Beaufort Sea and the Canada Basin," NSIDC scientist Julienne Stroeve said. "This appears to be an important driver for the low sea ice conditions over the past few summers."

Climate models have suggested that the Arctic could lose almost all of its summer ice cover by 2100, but in recent years, ice extent has declined faster than the models predicted.*


----------



## Ropey (Mar 20, 2012)

Old Rocks said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> > You can't refute so you ignore what has been presented by the people that oppose you, so you resort to the name calling?  Really?
> ...



That's not a refute. That's just proof that  the Arctic Sea Ice is in an ebb at the moment while some other aspects of "global warming" are showing the opposite.  There's nowhere near enough real evidence to show that we as humans are producing this effect. There's even less evidence that this 'effect' is global and not simply a seasonal drift of different environmental aspect.


----------



## Old Rocks (Mar 20, 2012)

Really? Links to real scientific information that supports your statement?

UAH Global Temperature Update for February 2012: -0.12 deg. C « Roy Spencer, Ph. D.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Mar 20, 2012)

RollingThunder said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > RollingThunder said:
> ...



Hey RETARD

There is a continent about the size of Australia underneath all this ice; the ice sheet sitting on top averages at a little over 2 kilometer (1.2 miles) thick. If all of this ice melted, it would raise global sea level by about 60 meter (197 feet). But little, if any, surface warming is occurring over East Antarctica.

NASA - Is Antarctica Melting?


----------



## Old Rocks (Mar 20, 2012)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> RollingThunder said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



Dumb ass, you stated Arctic, now you jump to Antarctic. However, you are equally clueless concerning that continent.

NASA: Earth Is Losing Half A Trillion Tons Of Ice A Year | ThinkProgress


----------



## Old Rocks (Mar 20, 2012)

NASA - NASA Mission Takes Stock of Earth's Melting Land Ice


----------



## Ropey (Mar 20, 2012)

Old Rocks said:


> Really? Links to real scientific information that supports your statement?
> 
> UAH Global Temperature Update for February 2012: -0.12 deg. C « Roy Spencer, Ph. D.



Re-read my previous posts in this thread. If you don't find enough evidence still, then try researching both sides instead of just one side.


----------



## saveliberty (Mar 20, 2012)

RollingThunder said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > RollingThunder said:
> ...



Sea ice?  Your going to blame atmospheric CO2 on melting sea ice?  How about shifting ocean currents?


----------



## Roudy (Mar 20, 2012)

RollingThunder said:


> percysunshine said:
> 
> 
> > RollingThunder said:
> ...



You know, I don't like doing other people's homework for them.  It's really simple just google it.  You obviously have a bias and are deaf to what other legitimate sources are saying, but here's a few for you to chew on:

*How Missing Sunspots Could Lead to Global Cooling *
ARTICLE DATE : June 15, 2011 

By Peter Pachal

Just days after the earth came close to being struck by a solar flare, some scientists are saying the sun will actually be soon entering a relatively inactive phase, leading to a drop in sunspot activity. Counterintuitively, however, this could potentially be just as troublesome for the planet.

Recent data collected from different groups of researchers suggests the sun may soon enter a particularly "quiet" period after the current active phase is finished, due to peak in 2013. Scientists have recorded both a decline in the magnitude of sunspotscooler areas of the sun's surface that are easily visible from earthand a delay in the "rush" of chunks of the sun's magnetic field toward the poles, which usually signals the beginning of a solar cycle (in the current one, they were late).

On top of that, jetstreams of solar material almost always mark the start of the solar cycle, and they have yet to occur.

"It's like a leading indicator in the stock market," says Dean Pesnell, a project scientist with NASA's Solar Dynamics Observatory. "We have leading indicators for solar activity as well. These zonal flows are one of those leading indicators that tells us the timing of the solar cycle. That leading indicator has been expected to show up for several years, and it still has not appeared."


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Mar 20, 2012)

Old Rocks said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > RollingThunder said:
> ...


OH you won you use think progress holy fucking shit.


----------



## Roudy (Mar 20, 2012)

...and here's another one. 

*NASA Says Earth Is Entering A Cooling Period*
by Jonathan DuHamel on Dec. 15, 2010, under Climate change

Most of the headlines are grabbed by NASAs James Hansen, Head of Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York. Hansen has been the doomsayer-sayer-in-chief of the climate alarmists along with Al Gore. Hansen has been quoted as saying, The trains carrying coal to power plants are death trains. But other NASA scientists who use satellites to collect real data, take a different view, and are now saying that our world should be just beginning to enter a new period of cooling  perhaps the next ice age.

Here is the complete NASA article:

What are the primary forcings of the Earth system?

The Sun is the primary forcing of Earths climate system. Sunlight warms our world. Sunlight drives atmospheric and oceanic circulation patterns. Sunlight powers the process of photosynthesis that plants need to grow. Sunlight causes convection which carries warmth and water vapor up into the sky where clouds form and bring rain. In short, the Sun drives almost every aspect of our worlds climate system and makes possible life as we know it.

Earths orbit around and orientation toward the Sun change over spans of many thousands of years. In turn, these changing orbital mechanics force climate to change because they change where and how much sunlight reaches Earth. Thus, changing Earths exposure to sunlight forces climate to change. According to scientists models of Earths orbit and orientation toward the Sun indicate that our world should be just beginning to enter a new period of cooling  perhaps the next ice age.


----------



## Roudy (Mar 20, 2012)

last one, there's obviously more where this came from:

Popular Technology.net: Global Cooling in 2008

*Global Cooling in 2008 *

2008 was a year of Global Cooling contrary to the propaganda promoted by Al Gore and the mainstream media about a "warming earth". Hundreds to thousands of people froze to death in India, China and Afghanistan. There was record breaking cold temperatures and snow falls yet the hysteria continued - a climate tour icebreaker got stuck in Arctic ice, AGW activists learned the hard way that the Arctic still had ice and snow fell as the UK's House of Commons debated Global Warming legislation. Ironic? Yes but the empirical evidence clearly shows that the climate is cooling:

2008 - Cold Weather Kills 38 in Northern India (FOX News, January 2, 2008)
2008 - Indian cold wave toll kills 90 (The Earth Times, January 3, 2008)
2008 - A cold spell soon to replace global warming (RIA Novosti, January 3, 2008)
2008 - Cold Stretches Throughout East; Flurries Reported in Florida (FOX News, January 3, 2008)
2008 - Br-r-r! Where did global warming go? (The Boston Globe, January 6, 2008)
2008 - Snow, winds close highways, collapse roofs in Wash. (USA Today, January 8, 2008)
2008 - First snow for 100 years falls on Baghdad (AFP, January 11, 2008)
2008 - Saudi Arabia covered with snow in coldest winter for 20 years (RIA Novosti, January 11, 2008)
2008 - Russian scientist says Earth could soon face new Ice Age (RIA Novosti, January 22, 2008)
2008 - China battles "coldest winter in 100 years" (Reuters, February 4, 2008)


----------



## RollingThunder (Mar 20, 2012)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> RollingThunder said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...


Talking to yourself again, I see. 






bigrebnc1775 said:


> There is a continent about the size of Australia underneath all this ice; the ice sheet sitting on top averages at a little over 2 kilometer (1.2 miles) thick. If all of this ice melted, it would raise global sea level by about 60 meter (197 feet). But little, if any, surface warming is occurring over East Antarctica.
> 
> NASA - Is Antarctica Melting?


You first posted this irrelevant and misleading nonsense in post #1196 on this thread and I refuted it in post #1204. Are you so retarded that you forgot that already?



RollingThunder said:


> What does this off topic stuff have to do with either the cold weather in Europe or the increase in record high temperatures in the US, moron. Are you grasping at straws again?
> 
> So there is little surface warming over East Antarctica. So what? It is the West Antarctic Ice Sheet that is melting fast and raising sea levels.
> 
> ...


----------



## RollingThunder (Mar 20, 2012)

Ropey said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> > Really? Links to real scientific information that supports your statement?
> ...



Your previous posts are retarded drivel. You have posted nothing that supports your braindead delusions.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Mar 20, 2012)

RollingThunder said:


> Ropey said:
> 
> 
> > Old Rocks said:
> ...



Everything you have posted is retarded.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Mar 20, 2012)

RollingThunder said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > RollingThunder said:
> ...


You are Retarded and without any comprehension skills. That explains you problem with the facts.


----------



## RollingThunder (Mar 20, 2012)

saveliberty said:


> RollingThunder said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...


Yes. And the world's climate scientists all agree. Your doubt about it is based only on your own ignorance and general brainwashed rightwingnut stupidity.




saveliberty said:


> How about shifting ocean currents?


How about pink unicorns, while you're at it. LOL.

*Arctic sea ice continues to shrink, even in frigid winter*
Alaska Dispatch
Jan 09, 2012
(excerpts) 
*Even as winter clamps down, our polar ice cap continues to dwindle. Despite the arrival of frigid winter temperatures north of Alaska, the sea ice of the Arctic Ocean ended 2011 far below average in both extent and volume, continuing its decades-long shrink toward summer oblivion, according to the most recent estimates posted online by polar observers. The total mass of ice -- its surface footprint plus the bulk hidden beneath the surface -- has never been lower for this time of year. The area covered was third smallest since 1979, with vast areas of ocean north of Europe remaining ice-free.

The polar cap has now lost almost half of its December volume since 1979 -- with much of the thick, multi-year ice that previously formed the ice cap's bedrock, so to speak, exiting into the Atlantic Ocean during summers. The total amount of ice in the Arctic remained at least 37 percent below the long-term average, explained a new analysis that drew on computer models, satellite feeds and observations by ships and submarines. Ice volume as of Dec. 31 was estimated to be lower than any previous New Year's Eve on record, as depicted on this chart posted by the Polar Science Center at the University of Washington.

The area of the Arctic Ocean covered by at least 15 percent floes averaged only about 4.78 million square miles during December -- the third lowest seen for that month since satellite monitoring began in 1979, the NSIDC said. Only Decembers of 2006 and 2010 were lower for that month, but the five of the six lowest Decembers have all occurred during the past six years. To put this loss into perspective, the Arctic has been losing 3.5 percent of its December ice cover per decade for a generation. An ice-bound wilderness larger than Washington, Oregon, California and Texas combined has completely disappeared from the Far Norths early winter habitat.*


----------



## RollingThunder (Mar 20, 2012)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> RollingThunder said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...


Still talking to yourself. Nailed it, too.


----------



## westwall (Mar 20, 2012)

RollingThunder said:


> IanC said:
> 
> 
> > The following table lists the highest and lowest temperatures recorded in each state in the United States, in both Fahrenheit and Celsius.
> ...







Yes, he does....and he FALSIFY'S every one of them!  He's an equal opportunity fraud.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Mar 20, 2012)

RollingThunder said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > RollingThunder said:
> ...



YOU are not me, when I say YOU it is YOU whom I am talking about. Damn moron doesn't even know what the word YOU means.


----------



## RollingThunder (Mar 20, 2012)

Roudy said:


> RollingThunder said:
> 
> 
> > percysunshine said:
> ...


You're not, so don't worry about it. You're just parroting stuff you obviously can't comprehend and don't even seem to have actually read. 

From the article you cited:

*"With temperatures rising worldwide due to global warming, though, maybe a cooling-off period is exactly what the planet needs. But for any hoping a weak solar cycle could provide a way to offset climate change, you can forget it. As Pesnell points out, "These are two independent effects. The solar signal will go up for awhile, but it's not an offset because if you just wait a couple of years, the sun will come back. They don't cancel each other out."

In any case, forecasting space weather is far from an exact science.

"There's an event where a number of experts try to predict the magnitude of the next solar cycle," says Michael Hesse, chief of NASA's Space Weather Laboratory at the Goddard Space Flight Center in Maryland. "The last time this happened was 2007 (for the current cycle), and the expert panel essentially predicted everything from a very large to a very small solar cycle. In other words, we don't really understand this at all.""*​





Roudy said:


> It's really simple just google it.  You obviously have a bias and are deaf to what other legitimate sources are saying,


You don't seem to have any idea what are the 'legitimate sources' or what they are saying. You use blogs and random stuff you don't read. Try using reputable scientific sources and you might overcome the brainwashing you've been subjected to.


----------



## RollingThunder (Mar 20, 2012)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> RollingThunder said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...


LOL. But little retard, it is you that is very retarded and without any comprehension skills and it is you that has a problem with the facts, as you have just repeatedly demonstrated in this thread. Everything you have claimed has been refuted and shown to be wrong. You are a clueless retarded brainwashed fool. Deal with it.


----------



## Old Rocks (Mar 20, 2012)

Roudy said:


> last one, there's obviously more where this came from:
> 
> Popular Technology.net: Global Cooling in 2008
> 
> ...



Dumb ass. 2010 tied 2005 and 1998 for the warmest year on record. And nine of the ten warmest years on record have been since 2000. The other year was, of course, 1998.

2011: The 9th hottest year on record | Bad Astronomy | Discover Magazine

2011 was the ninth hottest year on record, and those records go back 130 years. 

And then they might say, well, sure, but that could be coincidence. Then you look them straight in the eye, and you say:

Nine of the ten hottest years on record have been since 2000.

The map above shows changes from average (where the average is from 1951 to 1980). You see clearly that temperatures over land have increased almost universally. Most of the ocean temperatures have gone up as well; the one big cooler region in the eastern Pacific is due to the La Niña last year, so its a temporary effect. Even with La Niña dropping temperatures, the overall effect is an increase in temperature. Ill note that sunspot numbers were low last year as well, which (if anything) should result in a (very) slight cooling effect too. 

Climate change deniers will gnash and froth  I expect the comments to this post to reflect that, as they always do  but the bottom line is this. The Earth is getting hotter. Human beings are at least partly to blame, and the evidence has piled up that we are mostly to blame. Not the Sun, not cosmic rays, not orbital oscillations. Humans. 

As Ive said before, here are the facts:


The Earth is warming up. The rate of warming has increased in the past century or so. This corresponds to the time of the Industrial Revolution, when we started dumping greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. Greenhouse gases warm the planet (hence the name)  if they didnt wed have an average temperature below the freezing point of water. Carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas which is dumped into the atmosphere by humans to the tune of 30 billion tons per year, 100 times the amount from volcanoes. And finally, approximately 97% of climatologists who actually study climate agree that global warming is real, and caused by humans.

Given the vast amount of evidence supporting all this, denying it is fantasy. Again, that wont stop deniers: they will obfuscate, blow smoke, and nitpick details to make them seem important. But what theyre doing is fiddling while Earth burns.


----------



## RollingThunder (Mar 20, 2012)

westwall said:


> RollingThunder said:
> 
> 
> > IanC said:
> ...


Your denier cult myths, that you swallow without any evidence, are soooooo stupid. Dr. Hansen is one of the most highly respected and accomplished climate scientists in the world, and one of the most published, with many honors and awards from his peers. His work has been reviewed by hundreds of other climate scientists. Nothing was "_falsified_", you poor deluded cretin. 

*Dr James Hansen - Honors and awards*

*Hansen was elected to the National Academy of Sciences in 1996 for his "development of pioneering radiative transfer models and studies of planetary atmospheres; development of simplified and three-dimensional global climate models; explication of climate forcing mechanisms; analysis of current climate trends from observational data; and projections of anthropogenic impacts on the global climate system."[70] In 2001, he received the 7th Annual Heinz Award in the Environment (endowed with US$250,000) for his research on global warming,[71] and was listed as one of Time Magazine's 100 Most Influential People in 2006. Also in 2006, the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) selected James Hansen to receive their Award for Scientific Freedom and Responsibility "for his courageous and steadfast advocacy in support of scientists' responsibilities to communicate their scientific opinions and findings openly and honestly on matters of public importance."[72]

In 2007, Hansen shared the US $1 million Dan David Prize for "achievements having an outstanding scientific, technological, cultural or social impact on our world". In 2008, he received the PNC Bank Common Wealth Award of Distinguished Service for his "outstanding achievements" in science. At the end of 2008, Hansen was named by EarthSky Communications and a panel of 600 scientist-advisors as the Scientist Communicator of the Year, citing him as an "outspoken authority on climate change" who had "best communicated with the public about vital science issues or concepts during 2008."[73]

In 2009, Hansen was awarded the 2009 Carl-Gustaf Rossby Research Medal,[73] the highest honor bestowed by the American Meteorological Society, for his "outstanding contributions to climate modeling, understanding climate change forcings and sensitivity, and for clear communication of climate science in the public arena."[74]

Hansen won the 2010 Sophie Prize, set up in 1997 by Norwegian Jostein Gaarder, the author of the 1991 best-selling novel and teenagers' guide to philosophy "Sophie's World",[75] for his " key role for the development of our understanding of human-induced climate change."
*


----------



## Old Rocks (Mar 20, 2012)

westwall said:


> RollingThunder said:
> 
> 
> > IanC said:
> ...



Oh yes, of course. But then Dr. James Hansen is considered by many, here and abroad, the be the foremost climatologist in the world. And you are considered to be just another internet poster that makes continous claims, and never backs them up from reputable sources.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Mar 20, 2012)

RollingThunder said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > RollingThunder said:
> ...



The only thing I have repeatedly demonstrated is just how much you are a retard. Have the adults left the house without locking up the computer pass word?


----------



## Meister (Mar 20, 2012)

Old Rocks said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > RollingThunder said:
> ...



Of course he is...he's part of your religion.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Mar 20, 2012)

RollingThunder said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > RollingThunder said:
> ...


Honors and awards? obama got a Nobel peace prize. That's how much I think about awards. If that piece of shit can get one for doing nothing anyone can get an award.


----------



## RollingThunder (Mar 20, 2012)

Roudy said:


> ...and here's another one.


Yeah, here's another foolish article with faulty links and a lying headline, written by a nobody for a nowhere site. "_Tucson Citizen_" - LOL. Your usual level of 'scientific sources', I see. LOL.






Roudy said:


> *NASA Says Earth Is Entering A Cooling Period*
> TucsonCitizen.com
> by Jonathan DuHamel on Dec. 15, 2010, under Climate change


LOLOLOLOL.....only problem - NASA DIDN'T SAY THAT AT ALL, EVER.

The article you cite supposedly has a link to a NASA source but the link doesn't work. There is no substantiation of the ridiculous claims the denier cult 'reporter' makes. Not surprising, since he's just making it up.








Roudy said:


> Most of the headlines are grabbed by NASAs James Hansen, Head of Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York. Hansen has been the doomsayer-sayer-in-chief of the climate alarmists along with Al Gore. Hansen has been quoted as saying, The trains carrying coal to power plants are death trains. But other NASA scientists who use satellites to collect real data, take a different view, and are now saying that our world should be just beginning to enter a new period of cooling  perhaps the next ice age.
> 
> Here is the complete NASA article:{NO, IT ISN'T}
> 
> ...



"_According to scientists models of Earths orbit and orientation toward the Sun indicate that our world should be just beginning to enter a new period of cooling  perhaps the next ice age_" -  this is only remotely accurate if you assume that "_just beginning to enter_" actually means '*in a few millennia, maybe*'. 

*Next ice age not likely before 1,500 years: study
Reuters*
Jan 9, 2012
(excerpts)
*(Reuters) - High levels of carbon dioxide emissions in the atmosphere mean the next ice age is unlikely to begin for at least 1,500 years, an article in the journal Nature Geoscience said on Monday. Concentrations of the main gases blamed for global warming reached record levels in 2010 and will linger in the atmosphere for decades even if the world stopped pumping out emissions today, according to the U.N.'s weather agency.

Officially, the earth has been in an interglacial, or warmer period, for the last 10,000 to 15,000 years, and estimates vary on how long such periods last. "(Analysis) suggests that the end of the current interglacial (period) would occur within the next 1,500 years, if atmospheric CO2 concentrations do not exceed (around) 240 parts per million by volume (ppmv)," the study said. However, the current carbon dioxide concentration is of 390 ppmv, and at that level an increase in the volume of ice sheets would not be possible, it added. The world is forecast to grow hotter as greenhouse gases continue to rise, increasing threats such as extreme weather events and sea level rise. Scientists have warned that global temperature rise should be limited to within 2 degrees Celsius to avoid the worst effects of climate change but delays in curbing emissions growth are putting the planet at risk.*


----------



## RollingThunder (Mar 20, 2012)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> RollingThunder said:
> 
> 
> > westwall said:
> ...


....says the retard loser who never got any awards. LOLOLOL.


----------



## RollingThunder (Mar 20, 2012)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> RollingThunder said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



Your idiotic fantasies are belied by the content of your posts. Anyone can go back and see that every moronic bit of misinformation you posted was refuted by the facts.


----------



## westwall (Mar 20, 2012)

Meister said:


> You can't refute so you ignore what has been presented by the people that oppose you, so you resort to the name calling?  Really?









What do you expect?  He's 12.


----------



## westwall (Mar 20, 2012)

RollingThunder said:


> saveliberty said:
> 
> 
> > RollingThunder said:
> ...







Well crap.  They're lying.  Who woulda thunk it.


----------



## westwall (Mar 20, 2012)

RollingThunder said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > RollingThunder said:
> ...






Yes, every one of your baseless and fraudulent assertions has indeed been refuted by cold hard facts.  Just like the graph puts the ice loss assertion to bed.  Thanks for playing!


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Mar 20, 2012)

RollingThunder said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > RollingThunder said:
> ...



From the first post you made you have insulted anyone that didn't have your opinion I understand it's hard to try and get people to support a fantasy. But adults live in the real world. You live in a fantasy world.


----------



## daveman (Mar 20, 2012)

RollingThunder said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > RollingThunder said:
> ...



[ame=http://www.amazon.com/How-Win-Friends-Influence-People/dp/0671723650]Amazon.com: How to Win Friends & Influence People (9780671723651): Dale Carnegie: Books[/ame]


----------



## saveliberty (Mar 20, 2012)

RollingThunder said:


> saveliberty said:
> 
> 
> > RollingThunder said:
> ...



Your lack of climate science knowledge is funny.  Atmospheric CO2 is not going to change the deep ocean currents.  Volcanic action and other factors are far more direct causes.  Take some time to actually learn about the subject.


----------



## Meister (Mar 20, 2012)

saveliberty said:


> RollingThunder said:
> 
> 
> > saveliberty said:
> ...



I would expect pigs will fly before that ever happens.


----------



## starcraftzzz (Mar 20, 2012)

saveliberty said:


> Your lack of climate science knowledge is funny.  Atmospheric CO2 is not going to change the deep ocean currents.  Volcanic action and other factors are far more direct causes.  Take some time to actually learn about the subject.



Actually no. Global warming which is caused by CO2 and other human activities results in the melting of attic ice which then flows into the ocean.
Second all factors that are not human related if only they were taken into account the eart should be cooling (examples include sun, dust)
Also Volcano eruptions have been constant meaning they are not the result of increasing CO2 levels or warming/cooling trends


----------



## westwall (Mar 20, 2012)

starcraftzzz said:


> saveliberty said:
> 
> 
> > Your lack of climate science knowledge is funny.  Atmospheric CO2 is not going to change the deep ocean currents.  Volcanic action and other factors are far more direct causes.  Take some time to actually learn about the subject.
> ...







Incorrect Mr. Sock.  And in point of fact the globe is cooling...or havn't you been keeping up with the temp reports.


----------



## saveliberty (Mar 20, 2012)

starcraftzzz said:


> Actually no. Global warming which is caused by CO2 and other human activities results in the melting of attic ice which then flows into the ocean.
> Second all factors that are not human related if only they were taken into account the eart should be cooling (examples include sun, dust)
> Also Volcano eruptions have been constant meaning they are not the result of increasing CO2 levels or warming/cooling trends



No volcanic activity has peaks and valleys just as any other cycle on Earth.  They also do not happen in the same geographic area every time.  Note the Hawaiian Island chain.  I did not claim CO2 caused volcanic activity, but can see how your small mind would jump to that conclusion.

The Earth started cooling last year.  You are just too much a Faither to see it.  Global warming is the result of water vapor primarily.  True story.


----------



## RollingThunder (Mar 20, 2012)

westwall said:


> RollingThunder said:
> 
> 
> > saveliberty said:
> ...


No, walleyedretard, you're lying. You spew a lot of nonsense that you can never seem to actually back up with any evidence. You're a troll and a confused, brainwashed retard.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Mar 20, 2012)

RollingThunder said:


> westwall said:
> 
> 
> > RollingThunder said:
> ...



Did someone take away your pacifier?


----------



## starcraftzzz (Mar 20, 2012)

saveliberty said:


> starcraftzzz said:
> 
> 
> > Actually no. Global warming which is caused by CO2 and other human activities results in the melting of attic ice which then flows into the ocean.
> ...


Yes and those peaks and valleys have not changed. However just to let one know we are currently at a peak meaning if volcanoes were the only variable the earth should be cooling, yet instead it is warming.



saveliberty said:


> The Earth started cooling last year.  You are just too much a Faither to see it.  Global warming is the result of water vapor primarily.  True story.


Started cooling? The ten hottest years on record occurred after the year 2000, 2010 was the hottest on record that year.
The thing is that you are being stupid and telling us because temperature vary each year that if one year does not have a higher temp it means the earth is cooling. If you were intelligent you would look at trends which show the earth getting hotter and hotter.
The year 2008 was the coldest year of the decade but was the 10 hottest ever.
If you're going to post plz try to make it not as ignorant and stupid as your last one


----------



## RollingThunder (Mar 20, 2012)

westwall said:


> RollingThunder said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



I back up my claims with scientific evidence. Of course, that is beyond your comprehension.

You, on the other hand, never back up your lies and fraudulent claims with any actually evidence. The graph you just posted that you obviously can't understand, is meaningless to this debate. Here is the relevant graph concerning just ice extent. The trend over several decades shows a decrease of about 5% of average sea-ice cover per decade.





_Source: Rayner et.al, 2004, updated_

Arctic ice volume is also decreasing even faster (double the rate) as the older multi-year thick ice disappears.

*NASA Study Quantifies Role of Melt in Loss of Old Arctic Sea Ice
NASA*
11.09.10 
(govt publication - free to reproduce)
*A NASA analysis of satellite data quantified for the first time the amount of older and thicker "multiyear" sea ice lost from the Arctic through melt.

Since the start of the satellite record in 1979, scientists have observed the continued disappearance of older "multiyear" sea ice that survives more than one summer melt season. Some scientists suspected that this loss was due entirely to wind pushing the ice out of the Arctic Basin -- a process that scientists refer to as "export." In this study, Ron Kwok and Glenn Cunningham at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, Calif., used a suite of satellite data to clarify the relative role of export versus melt within the Arctic Ocean.

Kwok and Cunningham show that between 1993 and 2009, a significant amount of multiyear ice -- 1,400 cubic kilometers (336 cubic miles -- was lost due to melt, not export.

"The paper shows that there is indeed melt of old ice within the Arctic basin and the melt area has been increasing over the past several years," Kwok said. "The story is always more complicated -- there is melt as well as export -- but this is a another step in calculating the mass and area balance of the Arctic ice cover."

The results have implications for understanding how Arctic sea ice gets redistributed, where melt occurs in the Arctic Ocean and how the ocean, ice and atmosphere interact as a system to affect Earth's climate. The study was published October 2010 in Geophysical Research Letters.

Scientists track the annual cycle of Arctic sea ice coverage as it melts through the summer to reach a minimum extent each September, before refreezing through fall and winter. Much of that ice is seasonal, meaning that it forms and melts within the year.

But multiyear ice that survives more than one season has also been declining, as noted in previous work by Joey Comiso of NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Md., who shows a loss of about 10 percent per decade since the beginning of the satellite record in 1979. Scientists want to know where this loss is occurring.

"The decline of the multiyear ice cover of the last several decades has not been quantitatively explained," Kwok said.

To investigate the loss of multiyear ice, Kwok and Cunningham looked at a 17-year span of data from 1993 to 2009 from a range of polar-observing satellites and instruments including NASA's Quick Scatterometer (QuikScat); the Ice, Cloud and land Elevation Satellite (ICESat); the Advanced Microwave Scanning Radiometer (AMSR); and the European Space Agency's ERS-1 and ERS-2. Some instruments track ice coverage, while others track motion and concentration.

The team collected satellite images and tracked pixels of multiyear ice from April 1, prior to the onset of seasonal melt, and into the summer. Pixels that deviate away from images of the ice edge were considered lost to melt.

The team compared summertime melt of multiyear ice in the Beaufort Sea with estimates of ice lost from the Arctic basin through Fram Strait -- a major passage through which ice can exit the Arctic Ocean. The comparison revealed how much multiyear ice was lost to export and how much was lost to melt.

They found that over the 17-year period, an area of 947,000 square kilometers (365,639 square miles), or about 32 percent of the decline in multiyear sea ice area, was lost in the Beaufort Sea due to melt.

A similar calculation using thickness estimates from NASA's ICESat from 2004 to 2009 show a volume loss of 1,400 cubic kilometers (336 cubic miles), or about 20 percent of the total loss by volume.

How and where multiyear ice is lost has impacts on the Arctic system. For example, more loss by melt means more freshwater remains in local Arctic waters rather than being transported southward.

"These results also show that thick multiyear sea ice is not immune to melt in the Pacific sector of the Arctic Ocean in todays climate," Kwok said.

The additional freshwater from melt in the Pacific sector, which encompasses the area of study, could contribute to the freshening of the Beaufort Gyre and potentially influence circulation, but the degree of that influence remains uncertain.

Not all of the multiyear ice loss is accounted for, however. Ice loss through Fram Strait and from melt from 2005 to 2008 accounts for just 52 percent of total ice loss. The team suggests that melt in other Arctic regions and outflow through other passages besides Fram Strait could account for the difference.

*


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Mar 20, 2012)

starcraftzzz said:


> saveliberty said:
> 
> 
> > starcraftzzz said:
> ...


It has already been mentioned.
THE EARTH IS COLLING​


----------



## percysunshine (Mar 20, 2012)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> It has already been mentioned.
> THE EARTH IS COLLING​




If rdean has the leash, we are in deep shit.


----------



## RollingThunder (Mar 20, 2012)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> starcraftzzz said:
> 
> 
> > saveliberty said:
> ...



Your grasp of the facts is on a par with your spelling, you poor retarded nutjob.


----------



## percysunshine (Mar 20, 2012)

RollingThunder said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > starcraftzzz said:
> ...



You rich environmentalists are delusional. Give the money back to the people.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Mar 20, 2012)

RollingThunder said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > starcraftzzz said:
> ...


You fucking idiot it's a typo maybe I should have spelled it KOOLING
How many times are you going to get beat down with this lie?


> By Jens Bischof
> Climate change has become a topic of great public interest. Hardly a week goes by without newspaper articles proclaiming global warming, the greenhouse effect, melting polar ice caps and retreating glaciers. No self-respecting weather forecaster can resist the temptation to see a connection between slightly abnormal weather patterns and El Nino, the eternal culprit. And while it is clear that the burning of fossil fuels such as petroleum, coal and wood, and the ensuing rise of carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere must trigger a reaction of the global climate system, it is completely unknown exactly what kind of reaction will occur.





> The last 10,000 years of geological history are referred to as the Holocene Era. During that time, global climate has been relatively stable, with swings from warmer temperatures to cooler and back again. On average, however, there has not been the kind of extreme climate oscillation that has in the distant past led to periods of glaciation. Nevertheless, Earth is overdue for a cold snap. Close examination of the way ice is presently traveling in ocean water, from frigid to warmer regions of the globe, suggests that the mechanisms for widespread planetary cooling may once again be engaging.


http://www.odu.edu/ao/instadv/quest/Greenhouse.html
And who is Jens Bischof?
Department of Ocean, Earth and Atmospheric Sciences


----------



## RollingThunder (Mar 20, 2012)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> RollingThunder said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...


It doesn't actually matter much how you spell it 'cause it is still quite wrong. The Earth is not cooling, it is warming up due to the 40% increase in CO2 levels that is trapping more thermal energy within the Earth system.

*Met Office: World warmed even more in last ten years than previously thought when Arctic data added
The world warmed more in the last ten years than previously thought, according to a new global temperature series updated by the Met Office.* 
The Telegraph
19 Mar 2012
(excerpts)
*...a new analysis of land and sea temperatures, that includes new data from weather stations in the Arctic, has found the world is warming even more than previously thought. Between 1998 and 2010, temperatures rose by 0.11C, 0.04C more than previously estimated. The new data set also shifts around the hottest years on record, so that the new temperature series, known as HadCRUT4, is more in line with other global records held by NASA and NOAA in the US. The American series had already added Arctic temperatures from extrapolated information. Before it was thought the hottest years were 1998 followed by 2010, 2005, 2003 and 2002. The updated series puts 2010 as the hottest year on record followed by 2005, 1998, 2003 and 2006. The main conclusions of the new temperature series remains the same  that overall warming since 1850 has been around 0.75C and the 10 warmest years on record all occurred in the last 14 years. 

Most of the new data came from weather stations controlled by Russian scientists. "HadCRUT is underpinned by observations and weve previously been clear it may not be fully capturing changes in the Arctic because we have had so little data from the area," Professor Phil Jones, director of CRU said. "For the latest version we have included observations from more than 400 stations across the Arctic, Russia and Canada. This has led to better representation of what's going on in the large geographical region, said Prof Jones. Dr Peter Stott, Head of Climate Monitoring and Attribution at the Met Office, said the new series is "yet another piece of evidence that the world is warming". The scientific evidence is really strong that we are warming, he said.* 






bigrebnc1775 said:


> How many times are you going to get beat down with this lie?


LOLOLOL....good lord you're delusional. LOL. You might be pretty good at beating off but as far as you ever "_beating down_" anyone with your ignorant drivel, that's just hilariously delusiuonal.  You couldn't debate your way out of a wet paper bag, let alone "_beat_" anyone down.







bigrebnc1775 said:


> > By Jens Bischof
> > ...it is clear that the burning of fossil fuels such as petroleum, coal and wood, and the ensuing rise of carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere must trigger a reaction of the global climate system...


Wow little dude, ONE scientist and a geologist at that. LOL. You are sooooo clueless.

*Scientific opinion on climate change*
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

*Scientific opinion on climate change is that the Earth's climate system is unequivocally warming and it is more than 90% certain that humans are causing it through activities that increase concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, such as deforestation and burning fossil fuels.[1][2][3][4] This scientific consensus is expressed in synthesis reports, scientific bodies of national or international standing, and surveys of opinion among climate scientists. Individual scientists, universities, and laboratories contribute to the overall scientific opinion via their peer-reviewed publications, and the areas of collective agreement and relative certainty are summarised in these high level reports and surveys.

National and international science academies and scientific societies have assessed the current scientific opinion, in particular on recent global warming. These assessments have largely followed or endorsed the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) position of January 2001 which states:

    An increasing body of observations gives a collective picture of a warming world and other changes in the climate system... There is new and stronger evidence that most of the warming observed over the last 50 years is attributable to human activities.[5]

The main conclusions of the IPCC on global warming were the following:

1. The global average surface temperature has risen 0.6 ± 0.2 °C since the late 19th century, and 0.17 °C per decade in the last 30 years.[6]
   2. "There is new and stronger evidence that most of the warming observed over the last 50 years is attributable to human activities", in particular emissions of the greenhouse gases carbon dioxide and methane.[7]
   3. If greenhouse gas emissions continue the warming will also continue, with temperatures projected to increase by 1.4 °C to 5.8 °C between 1990 and 2100. Accompanying this temperature increase will be increases in some types of extreme weather and a projected sea level rise.[8] On balance the impacts of global warming will be significantly negative, especially for larger values of warming.[9]​
No scientific body of national or international standing has maintained a dissenting opinion; the last was the American Association of Petroleum Geologists, which in 2007 updated its 1999 statement rejecting the likelihood of human influence on recent climate with its current non-committal position.[10][11] Some other organizations, primarily those focusing on geology, also hold non-committal positions.

*


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Mar 20, 2012)

RollingThunder said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > RollingThunder said:
> ...





> Wow little dude, ONE scientist and a geologist at that. LOL. You are sooooo clueless.




Dumb Fuck he's not just any geologist His specialty is the Arctic ice.


> For 13 years, since the start of his dissertation, Dr. Bischof has studied the process of ice rafting. His specialty is the identification of ice rafted sand grains which can be frequently found dispersed in glacial marine deep-sea sediments. By linking these rock and mineral grains, which were transported by drifting ice during times of continental glaciations, to their respective sources, he was able to determine the directions of past ocean surface currents and to reconstructed an increasingly accurate picture of past climate changes. The results of his work will help to constrain climate models and have thus predictive value as well. Dr. Bischof's primary occupation is research, publishing, and applying for grants to keep the growing Arctic research group funded.


He's the expert you're just a troll

wikipedia? WTF man I gave you the expert and you use wiki and claim victory? Holy fucking shit you are delusional Fucking retard should have been swallowed at conception.


----------



## skookerasbil (Mar 20, 2012)

"Man-Made" global warming is a hoax.


----------



## saveliberty (Mar 20, 2012)

Maybe if he made the font even larger it would be more true?  lol

All these data sets are manipulated by scientists hell bent on keeping their jobs.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Mar 20, 2012)

saveliberty said:


> Maybe if he made the font even larger it would be more true?  lol
> 
> All these data sets are manipulated by scientists hell bent on keeping their jobs.



He's worse than Chris or Rdean if that is possible


----------



## Roudy (Mar 20, 2012)

Popular Technology.net: Global Cooling in 2009

*Global Cooling in 2009*

2009 was another year of global cooling, which saw numerous low temperature and high snowfall records smashed. The Dutch canals froze over for the first time in 12 years, record cold came to Al Gore's home town and ironically a blizzard dumped snow on the Copenhagen convention where world leaders met to try and stop global warming. It was so cold that even the BBC was forced to ask, what happened to global warming? As Climategate would reveal, IPCC scientists had been hard at work hiding evidence of global cooling. Yet the observational evidence cannot be ignored.



2009 - Record cold wind chills of -50 C recorded overnight in Saskatchewan (Canadian Press, January 4, 2009)
2009 - Coldest start to the New Year for seven years (The Daily Telegraph, UK, January 5, 2009)
2009 - Forget warming, greenhouse gases may trigger ice age (The Times of India, January 5, 2009)
2009 - London colder than Antarctica (The Daily Telegraph, UK, January 5, 2009)
2009 - Poor burn books to stay warm in chilly India, 55 dead (Reuters, January 5, 2009)
2009 - Cold streak breaks 1892 record, Saskatoon experiences 24 consecutive days of -25 C (The StarPhoenix, January 6, 2009)
2009 - Record cold weather payouts triggered as temperature hits -11C (The Times, UK, January 6, 2009)
2009 - Record-breaking cold -37 in Moose Jaw, Canada (The Moose Jaw Times Herald, Canada, January 6, 2009)
2009 - NCDCs own graphic shows decadal cooling trend (Watts Up With That?, January 6, 2009)


----------



## Old Rocks (Mar 20, 2012)

*So what does one of the world's foremost glacialogists state concerning this subject?*

A23A

Richard B. Alley (born 1957) is an American geologist and Evan Pugh Professor of Geosciences at the Pennsylvania State University.[3] He has authored more than 170 refereed scientific publications about the relationships between Earth's cryosphere and global climate change,[1] and is recognized by the Institute for Scientific Information as a "highly cited researcher."[4]

Awards and honors

Alley was awarded the Seligman Crystal in 2005 "for his prodigious contribution to our understanding of the stability of the ice sheets and glaciers of Antarctica and Greenland, and of erosion and sedimentation by this moving ice."[1] Alley is one of several Penn State earth scientists who are contributors to the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which shared the 2007 Nobel Prize with Al Gore.

In 2005 he was also the first recipient of the Louis Agassiz Medal for his "outstanding and sustained contribution to glaciology and for his effective communication of important scientific issues in the public policy arena".[9] His award citation stated "He is imaginative, sharp and humorous, and remains a thorn in the backside of the Bush administration."[9]

In 2008 Alley was elected to the National Academy of Sciences. He was elected a Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences in 2010.[10]


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Mar 20, 2012)

Old Rocks said:


> *So what does one of the world's foremost glacialogists state concerning this subject?*
> 
> A23A
> 
> ...



He parrots the same old worn out warmer bullshit. Oh did I mention obama was awarded the Nobel peace prize?


----------



## Old Rocks (Mar 20, 2012)

Roudy said:


> Popular Technology.net: Global Cooling in 2009
> 
> *Global Cooling in 2009*
> 
> ...



*Yup, and was warm enough elsewhere to make 2009 a very warm year. Second only to the tie of 1998, 2005, and 2010. And then we have 2011, with a double La Nina, coming in at 9th warmest.*

RealClimate: 2009 temperatures by Jim Hansen

If Its That Warm, How Come Its So Damned Cold? 


 by James Hansen, Reto Ruedy, Makiko Sato, and Ken Lo

 The past year, 2009, tied as the second warmest year in the 130 years of global instrumental temperature records, in the surface temperature analysis of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS). The Southern Hemisphere set a record as the warmest year for that half of the world. Global mean temperature, as shown in Figure 1a, was 0.57°C (1.0°F) warmer than climatology (the 1951-1980 base period). Southern Hemisphere mean temperature, as shown in Figure 1b, was 0.49°C (0.88°F) warmer than in the period of climatology.


----------



## saveliberty (Mar 20, 2012)

I guess if he really wanted to help the public and make his science trustworthy, there should have been less shameful manipulation of data and poor scienfitic study huh?


----------



## Old Rocks (Mar 20, 2012)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> > *So what does one of the world's foremost glacialogists state concerning this subject?*
> ...



LOL.   As does all the Scientific Societies, all the National Academies of Science, and all the major Univesities in the world. But a backwoods redneck just knows so much more than all of these scientists.


----------



## saveliberty (Mar 20, 2012)

Old Rocks said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Old Rocks said:
> ...



The scientific-industrial complex protects itself huh?


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Mar 20, 2012)

Old Rocks said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Old Rocks said:
> ...



Are all scientist on board with the warmer myth? No they aren't Maybe you should look at the one I posted.


----------



## Old Rocks (Mar 20, 2012)

No, not all on board, just 97% of them.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Mar 20, 2012)

saveliberty said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



Yes they do, if they don't they will find themselves fund less.


----------



## Old Rocks (Mar 20, 2012)

Ah yes. Just for you two dumb asses, let's replace the scientific-industrial complex with the religious-industrial complex. I am just so sure that a bunch of holy roller rednecks can do so much better at keeping pace with the scientific developments in industry in competition with other industrial nations.


----------



## saveliberty (Mar 20, 2012)

Old Rocks said:


> Ah yes. Just for you two dumb asses, let's replace the scientific-industrial complex with the religious-industrial complex. I am just so sure that a bunch of holy roller rednecks can do so much better at keeping pace with the scientific developments in industry in competition with other industrial nations.



Why do you think we call you Faithers?


----------



## Old Rocks (Mar 20, 2012)

Because you cannot refute the real science that we show you ideological fools. We post real scientific articles from peer reviewed scientific journals, and you post nonsense from an undegreed ex-TV weatherman.

AGW Observer


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Mar 20, 2012)

Old Rocks said:


> Because you cannot refute the real science that we show you ideological fools. We post real scientific articles from peer reviewed scientific journals, and you post nonsense from an undegreed ex-TV weatherman.
> 
> AGW Observer



Real science does not discard it's data before it get's peer review.


----------



## saveliberty (Mar 20, 2012)

Old Rocks said:


> Because you cannot refute the real science that we show you ideological fools. We post real scientific articles from peer reviewed scientific journals, and you post nonsense from an undegreed ex-TV weatherman.
> 
> AGW Observer



When in trouble, fall back on other scientific-industrial complex endorsements.


----------



## Old Rocks (Mar 20, 2012)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> > Because you cannot refute the real science that we show you ideological fools. We post real scientific articles from peer reviewed scientific journals, and you post nonsense from an undegreed ex-TV weatherman.
> ...



Those are all peer reviewed articles, boy.


----------



## Old Rocks (Mar 20, 2012)

saveliberty said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> > Because you cannot refute the real science that we show you ideological fools. We post real scientific articles from peer reviewed scientific journals, and you post nonsense from an undegreed ex-TV weatherman.
> ...



In trouble? Debating a flap yapper? You have yet to bring any evidence to support your view.


----------



## saveliberty (Mar 20, 2012)

Old Rocks said:


> saveliberty said:
> 
> 
> > Old Rocks said:
> ...



I simply refute yours.  Rather easily I might add.  For example, I have asked for model predictions on hurricanes, warm and cold spots or precipitation changes.


----------



## RollingThunder (Mar 20, 2012)

saveliberty said:


> I guess if he really wanted to help the public and make his science trustworthy, there should have been less shameful manipulation of data and poor scienfitic(sic) study huh?



"_shameful manipulation of data and poor scienfitic(sic) study_" - never happened, except in your denier cult myths and fantasies.

*Climate Skeptic Sponsors New Climate Study, Confirms Global Warming Is Real'
Popular Science*
10.24.2011
(excerpts)
*Last year, as climate change deniers were up in arms over the so-called Climategate controversy involving alleged manipulation of climate data, one skeptical scientist proposed taking a fresh look. Richard Muller, a physicist at the University of California-Berkeley and a self-described climate skeptic, undertook to review the temperature data underlying most global warming studies. Now his team has wrapped up their work, and it apparently solidifies the other studies findings. Actually, the Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature project found the Earth is getting even warmer than other climate scientists claim. Muller said earlier this year that he was surprised by his own findings; now he accepts what other groups have been saying for years, that the Earth is getting warmer in most locations over time.

The BEST study is notable for a few reasons aside from Mullers skepticism and the studys funding sources, which include the climate-change-denying Charles and David Koch  its also a very comprehensive look, examining skeptics claims in detail and with a gigantic amount of data points. The study combined 1.6 billion temperature reports from 39,000 temperature stations around the globe, using 15 preexisting data archives. Statisticians developed a new approach that let them use fragmented records, such as those from unreliable monitoring stations, which embiggened the overall data set by about five times. Mullers team also used satellite images to divide the world into urban and rural areas, which allowed them to correct for heat-island effects. And they ranked the quality of the monitoring stations, and found even poor stations accurately track temperature changes over time. Their conclusion? Global warming is real. Very real, if their numbers are to be believed  the BEST analysis found that at the locations that showed warming, temperatures rose by an average 1 to 2 degrees Celsius, much higher than the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change estimate of 0.64 degrees C.*


----------



## RollingThunder (Mar 20, 2012)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> > Because you cannot refute the real science that we show you ideological fools. We post real scientific articles from peer reviewed scientific journals, and you post nonsense from an undegreed ex-TV weatherman.
> ...



You wouldn't know 'real science' if it bit you, you poor dumbshit.

Meanwhile, no data was discarded, except in your idiotic denier cult myths. You spew a lot of really lame lies, bigshthd, but you can never seem to back up anything you say with any evidence. You just blow smoke out your ass about subjects you know nothing about.


----------



## saveliberty (Mar 20, 2012)

So using the manipulated data, someone came to the same conclusion.  No surprise there.  Seriously, what a lame retort.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Mar 20, 2012)

RollingThunder said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Old Rocks said:
> ...


I know more than you.


----------



## saveliberty (Mar 20, 2012)

Your numbers have dropped off to insignificance Faithers.  Global Warming has become Climate Change.  lol


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Mar 20, 2012)

RollingThunder said:


> saveliberty said:
> 
> 
> > I guess if he really wanted to help the public and make his science trustworthy, there should have been less shameful manipulation of data and poor scienfitic(sic) study huh?
> ...



Global Warming - Global Warming Facts and Global Climate Change Information


----------



## RollingThunder (Mar 20, 2012)

saveliberty said:


> So using the manipulated data, someone came to the same conclusion.  No surprise there.  Seriously, what a lame retort.


Your denier cult myths are really stupid and have no foundation in reality. There was no "_manipulated data_", just good data, competent analysis and sound science, repeated and confirmed by thousand of scientists all around the planet. You're just too retarded and brainwashed by your rightwing puppet masters stooging for the fossil fuel industry to know up from down. You are a pathetic idiot.


----------



## RollingThunder (Mar 20, 2012)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> RollingThunder said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



LOLOLOL....in your dreams, you pathetic retard.


----------



## saveliberty (Mar 20, 2012)

RollingThunder said:


> saveliberty said:
> 
> 
> > So using the manipulated data, someone came to the same conclusion.  No surprise there.  Seriously, what a lame retort.
> ...



I'm informed and that threatens you.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Mar 20, 2012)

RollingThunder said:


> saveliberty said:
> 
> 
> > So using the manipulated data, someone came to the same conclusion.  No surprise there.  Seriously, what a lame retort.
> ...



I would say you were a brainwashed warmer, that is if you had a brain. You are only repeating what you are directed to repeat.
Polly want a cracker?


----------



## RollingThunder (Mar 20, 2012)

saveliberty said:


> Your numbers have dropped off to insignificance Faithers.  Global Warming has become Climate Change.  lol


You poor, poor delusional retard. How did you get your head that far up your ass, anyway?

Worldwide, Gallup surveys in 111 countries found that the percentage of people who view global warming as a serious threat rose from 41% in 2007 to 42% in 2010.   

Also there's this poll.
*Poll Finds Worldwide Agreement That Climate Change is a Threat*

Of course, _public_ opinion polls have no bearing on the scientific reality of the situation. The only 'opinion polls' that mean anything are the ones taken of climate scientists, who are almost unanimous in affirming the reality and dangers of AGW/CC. 

*Surveys of scientists' views on climate change*
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

*STATS, 2007
In 2007, Harris Interactive surveyed 489 randomly selected members of either the American Meteorological Society or the American Geophysical Union for the Statistical Assessment Service (STATS) at George Mason University. The survey found 97% agreed that global temperatures have increased during the past 100 years; 84% say they personally believe human-induced warming is occurring, and 74% agree that &#8220;currently available scientific evidence&#8221; substantiates its occurrence. Only 5% believe that that human activity does not contribute to greenhouse warming; and 84% believe global climate change poses a moderate to very great danger.[8] [9]

Bray and von Storch, 2008
Dennis Bray and Hans von Storch conducted a survey in August 2008 of 2058 climate scientists from 34 different countries.[10] A web link with a unique identifier was given to each respondent to eliminate multiple responses. A total of 373 responses were received giving an overall response rate of 18.2%. No paper on climate change consensus based on this survey has been published yet (February 2010), but one on another subject has been published based on the survey.[11]

The survey was composed of 76 questions split into a number of sections. There were sections on the demographics of the respondents, their assessment of the state of climate science, how good the science is, climate change impacts, adaptation and mitigation, their opinion of the IPCC, and how well climate science was being communicated to the public. Most of the answers were on a scale from 1 to 7 from 'not at all' to 'very much'.

Edited, read entire article from the link provided*


----------



## RollingThunder (Mar 20, 2012)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> RollingThunder said:
> 
> 
> > saveliberty said:
> ...



I pretty much figured that a retard like you would be getting his misinformation from some lame-ass denier cult blog like that one but thanks for confirming it. LOL. You really are sooooo clueless. Other people (like me) cite NASA, NOAA, the NSIDC, UCAR, Scientific American, papers from reputable peer-reviewed science journals and scientists at major universities. Retards like you and your denier cult butt-buddies cite nonsense and drivel written by non-climate scientists stooging for the fossil fuel industry that you scrape off of denier cult blogs and Exxon funded 'think-tanks'/propaganda outlets. LOL.


----------



## RollingThunder (Mar 20, 2012)

saveliberty said:


> RollingThunder said:
> 
> 
> > saveliberty said:
> ...



You're rather stupid and very ignorant, and that amuses me.


----------



## RollingThunder (Mar 20, 2012)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> RollingThunder said:
> 
> 
> > saveliberty said:
> ...



If you had a brain, you might actually contribute something that is supported by some evidence to the debate instead of just always more meaningless unsupported nonsense and random bullshit.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Mar 21, 2012)

RollingThunder said:


> saveliberty said:
> 
> 
> > Your numbers have dropped off to insignificance Faithers.  Global Warming has become Climate Change.  lol
> ...


*
Stupid your religion is a myth, you swallowed the bullshit and asked for more. What proof you have given has been shot down.*


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Mar 21, 2012)

RollingThunder said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > RollingThunder said:
> ...



Did you get that butt hurt feeling when you found out that the global warming myth was busted? Do you have that butt hurt feeling because no one wants to join your religion?


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Mar 21, 2012)

RollingThunder said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > RollingThunder said:
> ...



Your post show you can't comprehend how to click on a link.
How many post have I made that I used NASA as a source?
Popular Science? You're a joke.


----------



## IanC (Mar 21, 2012)

RollingThunder said:


> IanC said:
> 
> 
> > The following table lists the highest and lowest temperatures recorded in each state in the United States, in both Fahrenheit and Celsius.
> ...





I agree that the high and low temps for individual states are not that important but we seem to be under a barrage of 'new records' everyday. Feynman started a lecture once by saying, "there is a car outside with the license plate xxx xxx, what are the chances of that?". if you look only for records or coincidences you will find them. the only way to get a reasonable idea of the overall picture is to define your parameters before you examine the data. in this case I chose individual States because it has a workable quantity and available information. you could chose something different, like capital cities or cities that start with the letter R, as long as they have records going back 100 years. a big fuss was made over Chicago having a 'record number' of days over 80F in March this year. unfortunately it seems that both 1910 and 1915 had more. how many records are set because of new stations, moved stations, or just laziness in checking out the history?



I also have a problem with the USA being ignored because it only has <2% of the land mass. it has more temperature measurements than any other area, and those measurements are of higher quality than just about anywhere else. and they show that there has been very little warming, especially when you remove the layer after layer of undocumented or un peer reviewed adjustments. if anything the USA just has too much information to get a clear idea about how things are being done and what the results show.

New Zealand is a small country with a long history of scientific accomplishment. their climate trends were based on a long term trend of just seven cities over the last 100+ years. in the 80's the NZ Met was controlled by a PhD who trained under Jones at UEA (univ of east anglia, climategate fame). the adjustments he introduced made the tiny country a star within the CAGW group. unfortunately it also attracted critics who finally made the govt demand to see the methodologies used. instead of opening their books to the public the NZ Met just quit! rather than explain and audit their work they just abandoned it.

perhaps the USA and other places should send auditors in to check out the information being used to influence the direction of programs that will end up spending trillions of dollars in the future.

a graphic example of Hansen's manipulation of US Temps. there have been many more since this graph was made.


----------



## IanC (Mar 21, 2012)

I am getting anxious to see how the BEST papers have done in peer review. it was months ago that the preliminary data was released. I want to see if their kridging method of cutting and combining the separate data strings has been found acceptable. if it has, expect another big increase in the other data sets, and more "its worse than we thought" articles. and maybe the Urban Heat Island paper will pass too. remember it? it says that concrete, buildings and asphalt actually cool things down. hahahaha


----------



## daveman (Mar 21, 2012)

RollingThunder said:


> Worldwide, Gallup surveys in 111 countries found that the percentage of people who view global warming as a serious threat rose from 41% in 2007 to 42% in 2010.


A thousand years ago, most people thought the world was flat.

Did that make it true?


----------



## saveliberty (Mar 21, 2012)

RollingThunder said:


> saveliberty said:
> 
> 
> > Your numbers have dropped off to insignificance Faithers.  Global Warming has become Climate Change.  lol
> ...




The only thing that matters is, how many of your 111 countries going to PAY for your science?  Maybe a dozen, and the US is less inclined to continue the funding, so you're screwed.


----------



## saveliberty (Mar 21, 2012)

daveman said:


> RollingThunder said:
> 
> 
> > Worldwide, Gallup surveys in 111 countries found that the percentage of people who view global warming as a serious threat rose from 41% in 2007 to 42% in 2010.
> ...



When you lie to poor countries, its just that much worse.  Bad Faithers.


----------



## RollingThunder (Mar 21, 2012)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> RollingThunder said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...


LOL. You poor deluded idiot, you've *never* actually used NASA as a source. You're just too retarded to realize that. You've used denier cult blogs that claimed a "NASA source" but those were lies. As I demonstrated by posting links to the actual NASA website that directly contradicted your stupid drivel, moron.


----------



## RollingThunder (Mar 21, 2012)

daveman said:


> RollingThunder said:
> 
> 
> > Worldwide, Gallup surveys in 111 countries found that the percentage of people who view global warming as a serious threat rose from 41% in 2007 to 42% in 2010.
> ...



*Myth of the Flat Earth*
Oh davedumb, you just never manage to be right about anything. That's sad. Completely to be expected though, given how extremely retarded you are.

***

A few misguided fools now believe, in spite of overwhelming evidence to the contrary, that mankind has nothing to do with the current abrupt warming trend the Earth is experiencing.

Does that make it true?


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Mar 21, 2012)

RollingThunder said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > RollingThunder said:
> ...



*You are a lying son of a bitch here is one of those NASA links I used and you have blatantly lied and said I did not*


bigrebnc1775 said:


> RollingThunder said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...


----------



## RollingThunder (Mar 21, 2012)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> RollingThunder said:
> 
> 
> > I would say you were a brainwashed warmer, that is if you had a brain. You are only repeating what you are directed to repeat.
> ...





bigrebnc1775 said:


> Stupid your religion is a myth, you swallowed the bullshit and asked for more. What proof you have given has been shot down.





bigrebnc1775 said:


> Did you get that butt hurt feeling when you found out that the global warming myth was busted? Do you have that butt hurt feeling because no one wants to join your religion?



Hey bigshithead, thanks for immediately demonstrating the accuracy of my comment. Your denier cult myths are really hilariously demented. Thanks also for all the chuckles you provide whenever I read your clueless drivel. You're a real hoot!


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Mar 21, 2012)

rollingthunder said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > rollingthunder said:
> ...



liar


----------



## RollingThunder (Mar 21, 2012)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> RollingThunder said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



LOLOL.....oh right.....you "_cited_" NASA by completely misinterpreting what they are saying. LOL. That was soooo retarded, I guess I just discounted it. We were talking about the loss of ARCTIC ICE, nitwit, and you brought up Antarctic. Perhaps you're too stupid and ignorant to know that there is a difference. Anyway, here's what the NASA article you supposedly cited actually said.

*Is Antarctica Melting?
NASA*
01.12.10
 (govt publication - free to reproduce)






_*The continent of Antarctica has been losing more than 100 cubic kilometers (24 cubic miles) of ice per year since 2002.*_

*There has been lots of talk lately about Antarctica and whether or not the continent's giant ice sheet is melting. One new paper 1, which states there&#8217;s less surface melting recently than in past years, has been cited as "proof" that there&#8217;s no global warming. Other evidence that the amount of sea ice around Antarctica seems to be increasing slightly 2-4 is being used in the same way. But both of these data points are misleading.Gravity data collected from space using NASA's Grace satellite show that Antarctica has been losing more than a hundred cubic kilometers (24 cubic miles) of ice each year since 2002. The latest data reveal that Antarctica is losing ice at an accelerating rate, too. How is it possible for surface melting to decrease, but for the continent to lose mass anyway? The answer boils down to the fact that ice can flow without melting.

Two-thirds of Antarctica is a high, cold desert. Known as East Antarctica, this section has an average altitude of about 2 kilometer (1.2 miles), higher than the American Colorado Plateau. There is a continent about the size of Australia underneath all this ice; the ice sheet sitting on top averages at a little over 2 kilometer (1.2 miles) thick. If all of this ice melted, it would raise global sea level by about 60 meter (197 feet). But little, if any, surface warming is occurring over East Antarctica. Radar and laser-based satellite data show a little mass loss at the edges of East Antarctica, which is being partly offset by accumulation of snow in the interior, although a very recent result from the NASA/German Aerospace Center's Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment (Grace) suggests that since 2006 there has been more ice loss from East Antarctica than previously thought 5. Overall, not much is going on in East Antarctica -- yet.
*
*A Frozen Hawaii*

*Edited read entire article from the link*


----------



## RollingThunder (Mar 21, 2012)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> rollingthunder said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...


No really, retard, you're hilarious, no lie.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Mar 21, 2012)

rollingthunder said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > rollingthunder said:
> ...



liar


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Mar 21, 2012)

RollingThunder said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > RollingThunder said:
> ...



You have the comprehension problem NASA SAID THEIR IS NOT ICE MELTING.


----------



## saveliberty (Mar 21, 2012)

Ice compresses as it gains mass in a glacier.  The satellite cannot measure depth, so that part is approximated by scientists.  Care to guess which ones?  Ice mass calculations, funny stuff.


----------



## westwall (Mar 21, 2012)

Old Rocks said:


> Ah yes. Just for you two dumb asses, let's replace the scientific-industrial complex with the religious-industrial complex. I am just so sure that a bunch of holy roller rednecks can do so much better at keeping pace with the scientific developments in industry in competition with other industrial nations.







Exteremes Moriarity.  Extremes.  Instead of falling apart in an emotional outburst let's look at things logically.  The military industrial complex we all agree is bad.  It leads to death and destruction in order to feed itself.  Yes?  So now, we have the scientific industrial complex and guess what, it too is causing death and destruction in order to advance its goals.

See how easy that was.  We should all agree that ANY group that places its financial well being above that of the common man is a terrible thing.  And it SHOULD be stopped.


Yes?


----------



## RollingThunder (Mar 21, 2012)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> RollingThunder said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



Incredible!!!! Are you really *THAT* retarded???? Incredible!!! Are you 8 years old??? Do words with more than one syllable  hopelessly confuse you??? Do you imagine that other people are incapable of looking at that NASA article and counting the number of times they talk about melting ice and ice mass loss? Some ice in Antarctica is definitely melting, cretin, as NASA makes quite clear, and even more ice is being lost as the ice shelves disintegrate in warmer ocean waters and massive glaciers suddenly start rushing to the sea.

You really are hilariously funny, bigshithead, in a kind of sad pathetic way. I wind up feeling a combination of amusement at your utter stupidity and cluelessness and horrified pity for your confused craziness. You must have a hard life, when even retarded dogs can easily cheat you at cards.


----------



## RollingThunder (Mar 21, 2012)

westwall said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> > Ah yes. Just for you two dumb asses, let's replace the scientific-industrial complex with the religious-industrial complex. I am just so sure that a bunch of holy roller rednecks can do so much better at keeping pace with the scientific developments in industry in competition with other industrial nations.
> ...


Well, that would be a first for you, walleyed. Almost impossible for you though, given how retarded and illogical you basically are.






westwall said:


> We should all agree that ANY group that places its financial well being above that of the common man is a terrible thing.  And it SHOULD be stopped. Yes?


That would describe the fossil fuel industry 'to a T'. Glad you've come to agree that their propaganda campaign and behind the scenes political bribery and manipulation "_SHOULD be stopped_". You know, the propaganda campaign that you fell for that seeks to confuse the public about the reality and extreme dangers of anthropogenic global warming and its associated climate changes in order to protect and prolong their trillion dollar per year profit stream from the extraction, transporting, refining and sales of fossil fuels. Let's get the people behind this effort and try them for 'crimes against humanity'. That would actually be very appropriate. That may not be generally recognized, of course, until after the first few hundred million people die from starvation and other climate change effects and the depths of fossil fuel industry's evil greed is fully recognized.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Mar 21, 2012)

RollingThunder said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > RollingThunder said:
> ...



You are incredibly stupid, and a liar.


----------



## RollingThunder (Mar 21, 2012)

saveliberty said:


> Ice compresses as it gains mass in a glacier.  The satellite cannot measure depth, so that part is approximated by scientists.  Care to guess which ones?  Ice mass calculations, funny stuff.



The satellites can measure changes in gravitational mass. Something that is clearly far beyond your comprehension, nitwit. Compression is not a factor in these ice mass calculations, but seriously, are you really so naive as to think that scientists don't take every possible factor into consideration when they study the Antarctic? LOL. You really don't know much about this subject.


----------



## RollingThunder (Mar 21, 2012)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> RollingThunder said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



Oh....so you *are* 8 years old....kinda thought so....


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Mar 21, 2012)

RollingThunder said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > RollingThunder said:
> ...



From reading your past replies I think your mental age is around 6 acting as if you are 35.


----------



## RollingThunder (Mar 21, 2012)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> RollingThunder said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



Oh come on....you've already demonstrated that you can't read....


----------



## westwall (Mar 21, 2012)

Don't Feed The Trolls!


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Mar 21, 2012)

westwall said:


> Don't Feed The Trolls!



You are right.


----------



## saveliberty (Mar 21, 2012)

RollingThunder said:


> saveliberty said:
> 
> 
> > Ice compresses as it gains mass in a glacier.  The satellite cannot measure depth, so that part is approximated by scientists.  Care to guess which ones?  Ice mass calculations, funny stuff.
> ...




The CU-led team also *used GRACE data to calculate *that the ice loss from both Greenland and Antarctica, including their peripheral ice caps and glaciers, was roughly 385 billion tons of ice annually.

One unexpected study result from GRACE was that the estimated ice loss from high Asia mountains -- including ranges like the Himalaya, the Pamir and the Tien Shan -- was only about 4 billion tons of ice annually.  Some previous ground-based estimates of ice loss in the high Asia mountains have ranged up to 50 billion tons annually, Wahr said.

&#8220;One big question is how sea level rise is going to change in this century,&#8221; said Pfeffer. &#8220;If we could understand the physics more completely and perfect numerical models to simulate all of the processes controlling sea level -- especially glacier and ice sheet changes -- we would have a much better means to make predictions. But we are not quite there yet.&#8221;

CU-Boulder study shows global glaciers, ice caps shedding billions of tons of mass annually | University of Colorado Boulder

Lots of errors in your "science".


----------



## skookerasbil (Mar 21, 2012)

LOL...........still the 8 year olds are winning!!!




*Alternate energy sources still a far-off dream*

By Jock Finlayson, Vancouver Sun March 21, 2012

The annual global energy outlook released by the Paris-based Inter-national Energy Agency (IEA) is a timely, if sobering, reminder of the enduring place of fossil fuels in the over-all energy mix.

Energy demand and supply pat-terns change only slowly, and despite the earnest wishes of politicians and environmentalists, shifting away from existing carbon-intensive energy systems will take generations, not years.

The main fossil fuel-based energy sources that largely satisfy the consumption needs of the world's population have a bright future.

Blame it all on economic growth According to the IEA, even if governments around the globe fully deliver on the commitments they have made to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and phase out fossil fuel subsidies - a very big "if" - world primary energy demand is still projected to rise by 36 per cent between 2008 and 2035, almost wholly due to economic growth and rising incomes in emerging markets.

Fossil fuels account for more than half of the increase in energy use to 2035, with oil remaining the dominant individual source of energy (albeit its share diminishes over time). World oil demand is expected to increase by 15 million barrels to reach 99 million barrels per day by 2035, with virtually all of the incremental demand coming from emerging economies.

Among the advanced economies that make up the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), demand for oil drops by six million barrels per day over the same period. According to the IEA's projections, coal-fired electricity generation continues to expand on a global basis

The IEA also shines a spotlight on the growing importance of natural gas in the energy equation. While consumption fell in 2009 as the global economic downturn took its toll on demand, use of natural gas is poised to climb by 44 per cent by 2035, out-pacing growth in demand for all other fossil fuels.

Natural gas is a low-cost energy source, it is the least carbon-intensive fossil fuel, and gas-fired power plants can be built in proximity to population centres in a relatively short period of time. Natural gas consumption is projected by the IEA to grow the fastest in China, but the fuel is also becoming more popular in many other markets, including in North America.

What about the various renewable, carbon-free energy sources touted by environmentalists and supported by many governments? With "new policies" in place, the IEA hopes that renewables can supply one-third of the world's electricity needs by 2035, up from one-fifth today. Hydro-power and wind are the chief beneficiaries of this increase, although solar, geothermal and bio-mass will also play bigger roles as sources of electricity in the future.

All of this underscores the immense challenges involved in shifting energy systems away from existing fuel sources and infrastructure, a point long emphasized by Canadian scholar Vaclav Smil. As Professor Smil noted in an article on trends in U.S. energy consumption published in 2009: "It took 45 years for the U.S. to raise its crude oil use to 20 per cent of the total energy supply; natural gas needed 65 years to do the same. As for electricity generation, coal produced 66 per cent of the total in 1950 and still 49 per cent in 2007 - wind-driven generation now produces 1.5 per cent and solar photovoltaic a fraction of that. Whatever the eventual solution, whether it is converting the country's filling stations to natural gas or hydrogen, or building new long-distance transmission lines to carry Arizona's solar electricity to New York and North Dakota's wind power to California, the new requisite infrastructures are unlikely to be completed in the next few years."

It's hard to see how carbon-free energy can be expanded on the scale necessary to make a significant difference to the global energy supply mix in the next decade. The reality is that the world's energy system in 2020 is apt to look very similar to the one that exists today.

Jock Finlayson is executive vice-president of the Business Council of British Columbia.


Read more: Alternate energy sources still a far-off dream





And who's losing?





fAiLiNg

http://www.upi.com/Business_News/2012/03/20/Poll-Alternative-energy-loses-support/UPI-21181332217270/


----------



## Roudy (Mar 21, 2012)

RollingThunder said:


> saveliberty said:
> 
> 
> > So using the manipulated data, someone came to the same conclusion.  No surprise there.  Seriously, what a lame retort.
> ...



This case in particular showed scientists falsifying data, and presenting intentionally skewed or misleading conclusions that would support a false global warming theory.  Why else would they do such a thing if the data and conclusions supported their hypothesis anyhow?  What you're saying makes no sense. Plus there are many other scientists (as qualified if not more)  including data from NASA do not agree with a Global Warming theory, especially one that is influenced by man.


----------



## daveman (Mar 21, 2012)

saveliberty said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > RollingThunder said:
> ...


Leftists have never had a problem with lying in service of their agenda.


----------



## daveman (Mar 21, 2012)

RollingThunder said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > RollingThunder said:
> ...








So, you disagree that lots of people believing things makes them true.

I trust you'll stop with your "consensus" horseshit, then.

But of course you won't.


----------



## saveliberty (Mar 21, 2012)

I think I enjoy reading Faither sources the most.  Finding those overlooked major flaws and contradictory data or footnotes.  lol


----------



## Chris (Jun 29, 2012)

According to the agencys data, 41 records have fallen or been tied in the past seven days, and the same number in the past 30 days. Over the past 365 days, 233 all-time records have fallen.

The numbers are equally impressive when it comes to just daily records. On Wednesday, 196 daily high temperature records were topped, increasing the past seven days worth of records to 1,133.  When looking at the past 30 days, the number of broken daily records climbs to 2,359 and -- like mercury breaking through the top of a thermometer -- hits 34,294 over the past 365 days.

According to Crouch, the records have been falling for months, especially because March was an especially warm month.

Heat wave rolls through the U.S., toppling records - latimes.com


----------



## Chris (Jun 29, 2012)

Temperatures soared across the Midwest on Thursday, reaching a blistering 108 degrees Fahrenheit (42 Celsius) in St. Louis, and possibly causing two deaths in KansasCity, Missouri, as a massive heat wave pressed eastward from the Rockies.

Farther to the east, it was 102 (39 C)in Cincinnati and 103 (39 C) in Nashville, Tennessee.

"It's when you stop sweating and you get goose bumps that you worry," said Sean Lachendro, one of a trio installing fiber-optic line for T-Mobile along a south Nashville roadside.

In Chicago, the high temperature reached 100 degrees (38 C) for the first time in seven years. Summer school was closed Thursday for 10 Chicago public schools without air conditioning.

US heat wave: Three-digit temperatures recorded across Midwest - CSMonitor.com


----------



## Old Rocks (Jun 29, 2012)

Now Chris, you know that is all doctored data. And there are only a few little brushfires in Colorado and the Mountain West. A fire in New Mexico this year that broke the record for square miles burned, the record that was set last year. Naw, just 'Librul' pinko reporters exagerating.

And we are still in a neutral ENSO situation. An El Nino is inevitable, and if its a big one, Katie bar the door.


----------



## daveman (Jun 29, 2012)

It's called "weather", people.  It's not climate.  

Even if you really really really want it to be.


----------



## Chris (Jun 29, 2012)

By midafternoon Friday, temperatures had climbed to 100 degrees in Indianapolis; 101 in Richmond, Virginia; and 102 degrees in St. Louis, where highs were forecast to stay above 100 through Thursday, the National Weather Service said.

And it felt even hotter in some places, with the heat index topping out around 115 degrees.

In Memphis, Tennessee, where highs hit 105 degrees Friday, firefighters went door to door, checking on residents to make sure they're bearing the weather well. Churches and faith-based institutions were also urged to reach out to people and to ask people to check on their neighbors and relatives.

Intense heat bakes tens of millions in U.S., spawns potent storms - CNN.com


----------



## Peach (Jun 29, 2012)

Over 100 in Ohio two days i a row,from a cousin of mine. The St. Mary's river broke the prior record for highest crest, due the deluge of TWO TS making landfall in one three weeks span, IN NORTH FLORIDA. Seems like a lot of interesting weather in the last few years; we here are looking a 100 tomorrow, rare for the end of June.


----------



## Chris (Jun 29, 2012)

A late-June heat wave continues to rewrite the record books across a large swath of the country.  Friday brought several all-time record highs, including 109 degrees at both Nashville, Tenn., and Columbia, S.C.  In addition, a slew of June monthly records were tied or broken from the Ohio Valley to the Carolinas.

The previous day, Ft. Wayne, Ind. tied its all-time record high from 1988 and the "Dust Bowl" years of 1936 and 1934!  Monthly records were tied or broken from Ohio to Arkansas.  It was the hottest single day in Indianapolis since 1954, and was the sixth straight day of 110-plus degree heat in Hill City, Kan.  

Will Your City Hit 100 Degrees? - weather.com


----------



## Chris (Jun 29, 2012)

The map at this link is beyond belief.....

http://www.weather.com/news/weather-forecast/will-you-hit-100-degrees-20120626?pageno=2

From 113 in Phoenix to 106 in Charlotte.


----------



## Mr. H. (Jun 30, 2012)

I sort of like this guy's approach- deal with it. 

Exxon CEO calls climate change engineering problem | Reuters


----------



## skookerasbil (Jun 30, 2012)

Thanks for the info s0n..........lovin' this hot weather in New York!!! Looking forward to heading to the ocean later this am............


----------



## waltky (Jun 30, 2012)

It's so hot, the raccoons is takin' up residence in our a/c ducts...

*Extreme heat wave is taking its toll across the nation*
_30 June`12 - This week's scorching heat wave has already killed several people across the USA, and will probably cause emergency room visits to spike this weekend, health officials say._


> Local media and state health officials reported multiple heat-related deaths. In North Carolina, a 2-year-old child in Burke County died after being left in a car. In Kansas, heat is suspected in the deaths of a 60-year-old man and a child. Three heat related deaths occurred in Virginia. And in Queens, N.Y., an 81-year-old man died from heat exposure.  Oven-like temperatures topping 100 will blast much of the Mississippi Valley, Southeast and Mid-Atlantic, setting daily and some all-time heat records through Sunday, says Meteorologist Brian Korte of the National Weather Service. Columbia, S.C., reached 109 Friday, beating an all-time record of 107 last reached in August 2007.  By mid-week, the eastern portion of the country will cool a bit, but extreme heat will return to the Great Plains, Korte said.
> 
> In Indiana, where temperatures topped 100 this week, state health officials logged 46 heat-related complaints in one day, Thursday. The state averages 62 heat-related hospital visits per week in late June and early July, says Indiana State Health Commissioner Gregory Larkin.  "We encourage people who don't have air conditioning to retreat to public areas, libraries, shopping malls, swimming pools or other areas that are cool to allow them to protect themselves," Larkin says.  In Jackson, Miss., where temperatures reached 100 Friday, doctors have treated about twice the normal number of patients for heat-related symptoms so far this month, says Richard Summers, chairman of emergency medicine for the University of Mississippi Medical Center. One patient arrived at the emergency room with excessive blood pressure of 296 over 180  normal is 120 over 80  and was treated with intravenous cooling fluids.  "This is a hotter June than usual," Summers says. Even though people in the Deep South are accustomed to the heat, "We have seen numbers trending up."
> 
> ...


----------



## uscitizen (Jun 30, 2012)

34,000 record highs in the past year 

The quality of Pot has gone up.


----------



## bobgnote (Jun 30, 2012)

Mr. H. said:


> I sort of like this guy's approach- deal with it.
> 
> Exxon CEO calls climate change engineering problem | Reuters



_Mr.Exxon notes people who aren't burning fossil fuels already would benefit, from getting busy, to burn fossil fuels.  

Hillary Clinton notes governments cannot address climate change, alone.  So Exxon is going to help reduce carbon emissions, former Goldwater Girl?

Exxon wll help us challenge the P/T Extinction, 251 m.y.a., for the number one killer extinction event, of all time!  Ho-ho-ho-Hilarious.

*Mr.Hole* must have an ace, hidden away, somewhere.  Whip it out, *Hole*._


----------



## Big Fitz (Jun 30, 2012)

skookerasbil said:


> Thanks for the info s0n..........lovin' this hot weather in New York!!! Looking forward to heading to the ocean later this am............


The ecofascisti are going to go crazier using the inverse statement we do when it's a cold winter. OMG IT'S SO HOT!  IT'S GLOWBULL WURMING AND IT'S ALL YOUR FAULT EBIL CONSERVITIVES!!!!!

Except.... they're serious... not mocking.


----------



## bobgnote (Jun 30, 2012)

_*Pig Shitz* doesn't realize, Monsanto scientists are moving from genetic engineering, of controversial, funky corn, to designing smart plants, which kill or disable idiot-wingpunk-fucktard-climate-change-denying ZOMBIES, like *Pig Shitz* and his rambling, brain-eating horde.

Then we will re-green, or eat shit, and die, in Mass Extinction Event 6, which will challenge the P/T Extinction, for the number one position, of all global extinction events, in geologic time.

251 m.y.a., most oceanic species and 7 of 10 land species died out, and all species suffered die-offs, while methane oozed out, like CH4 is out-gassing, today.  All we need is volcanism, to catch up to all the symptoms, of the P/T.  Want to pee tardy, at global climate change, *Pig Shitz*?  What will your Tea Party think, when ice tea isn't around, anymore?  Eat shit, you porky zombie. 

You sure are porky, shitty, and stupid as shit, all at once, you fucking idiot zombie._


----------



## skookerasbil (Jun 30, 2012)

All this heat and power loss is a great opportunty for people to practice being without power...........especially since the EPA keeps reaping havoc on real power generating sources that people could actually depend on.


----------



## skookerasbil (Jun 30, 2012)

bobgnote said:


> _*Pig Shitz* doesn't realize, Monsanto scientists are moving from genetic engineering, of controversial, funky corn, to designing smart plants, which kill or disable idiot-wingpunk-fucktard-climate-change-denying ZOMBIES, like *Pig Shitz* and his rambling, brain-eating horde.
> 
> Then we will re-green, or eat shit, and die, in Mass Extinction Event 6, which will challenge the P/T Extinction, for the number one position, of all global extinction events, in geologic time.
> 
> ...




fAiL s0n........might as well go out and buy a few chinstraps and be prepared to buckle them up for a spell.........as in decades. We'll green up alraight, but only to a fringe extent Im  happy to say!! And you can continue to throw up scores upon scores of hysteria threads. They wont add up to dick and dont you worry.........we're all quite happy eating shit and dying anyway.


These environmental goofballs........they are carbon copies of gambling junkies and think the rest of the world embraces being a gambling junkie..........like they are in a heartbeat ready to give up thier lifestyle to the k00ks in the hopes zero emmissions makes a wholesale change in nature. 

OK s0n.......Im sure the people are lining up for this!!!


----------



## Katzndogz (Jun 30, 2012)

To liberals it's brand new information to learn that the sun is really, really HOT.


----------



## Big Fitz (Jun 30, 2012)

Katzndogz said:


> To liberals it's brand new information to learn that the sun is really, really HOT.


Or that the sun can vary in temperature based on solar cycles that are beyond man's control.


----------



## daveman (Jun 30, 2012)

bobgnote said:


> _*Pig Shitz* doesn't realize, Monsanto scientists are moving from genetic engineering, of controversial, funky corn, to designing smart plants, which kill or disable idiot-wingpunk-fucktard-climate-change-denying ZOMBIES, like *Pig Shitz* and his rambling, brain-eating horde.
> 
> Then we will re-green, or eat shit, and die, in Mass Extinction Event 6, which will challenge the P/T Extinction, for the number one position, of all global extinction events, in geologic time.
> 
> ...


----------



## Chris (Jun 30, 2012)

According to the agencys data, 41 records have fallen or been tied in the past seven days, and the same number in the past 30 days. Over the past 365 days, 233 all-time records have fallen.

The numbers are equally impressive when it comes to just daily records. On Wednesday, 196 daily high temperature records were topped, increasing the past seven days worth of records to 1,133.  When looking at the past 30 days, the number of broken daily records climbs to 2,359 and -- like mercury breaking through the top of a thermometer -- hits 34,294 over the past 365 days.

Heat wave rolls through the U.S., toppling records - latimes.com


----------



## Cowman (Jul 1, 2012)

Man, it's a little chilly out here in Texas!


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 1, 2012)

and?


----------



## Old Rocks (Jul 1, 2012)

10,000 still displaced in raging Colorado wildfire


----------



## Katzndogz (Jul 1, 2012)

That must mean it's time to sacrifice something to the weather gods.


----------



## bobgnote (Jul 1, 2012)

Cowman said:


> Man, it's a little chilly out here in Texas!



_Yep.  Thousands of record temps, lots of wildfires, and Texas isn't getting burned down, not yet.  The Heat won the NBA title, taking over, for the Mavs.

You know, you just can't beat African Americans, at hoops.  You must admit, Obamney sack race notwithstanding, black Obamney beats white Obamney, at hoop, and probably at hip-hopping, for President.

When the heat gets too tough, and the zombies won't stop strolling, you will be glad, when some superior athlete gets ahold of a gun and does his thing, or watch it on TV:






Looks kind of like *DaveDDD* rambling down the road, doesn't it?  Watch out for Monsanto, too, *DDD*.  They'll get up some smart plants, targeting the sucksassandballs infestation, and if any *DDDaves* are rambling, some kind of new weed will trip you up._

Pondering a Link Between Forest Fires and Climate Change - NYTimes.com

According to Heat Waves and Climate Change, a new report from Climate Communication, as of June 18 there had been nearly 10 times as many high-temperature records this year as low-temperature records.

If the climate were neither warming nor cooling, one would expect that on average, low-temperature records would be broken as often as high-temperature ones. In the last decade, high-temperature records have outnumbered low-temperature records by a ratio of 2 to 1.

What scares firefighters is there are still two to three months of summer to go, said Steven Running, a University of Montana forest ecologist who also took part in the conference call.

Current high temperatures are partly to blame for the early fires, but so are the low levels of precipitation this year and the lack of extremely cold nights last winter. The low snowpack and early snowmelt have made the forests dry and flammable.

Mountain pine beetle larvae have survived at higher-than-usual rates in recent years because there arent as many extremely cold winter nights to kill them, which has led to forests full of dry, dead trees.

Late-summer fires often come to more natural ends, as firefighters collaborate with falling temperatures to slow their progress. But early summer fires are more challenging, Dr. Running said, as firefighters may not be able to count on the weathers assistance.

Climate Communication | Overview

Relative increase of record high maximum temperatures compared to record low minimum temperatures in the U.S.

-----------------------

_Zombie DDDs suck!  Hurry up with those smart plants, Monsanto._


----------



## Chris (Jul 1, 2012)

(CNN) -- People in a huge swath of the United States are being urged to seek out shelters as needed on Sunday as a historic heat wave continues to bring sizzing temperatures -- including to some who have lost power.

Extreme heat is the leading cause of weather-related deaths in the United States.

Twenty states were either partially or entirely under excessive heat warnings or heat advisories on Sunday, according to the National Weather Service. Temperatures over 100 degrees Fahrenheit were expected in much of the Southeast.

New York City was among the sites in the Northeast facing heat advisories. The National Weather Service said the advisory would be in effect from noon until 7 p.m. ET for the city, with temperatures expected in the mid-90s. When combined with humidity, it could feel like 100 degrees.

Over the past week, nearly 1600 high temperatures have been broken -- including 140 all-time highs, according to the National Climatic Data Center. Statistics for Saturday, when more records were broken, were not yet available.

Lives in danger as many seek refuge from extreme heat - CNN.com


----------



## Big Fitz (Jul 1, 2012)

After months and months of nothing about records, back comes PissyChrissy with more refrains from the Chicken Little Chorus Cargo Cult.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 1, 2012)

Big Fitz said:


> After months and months of nothing about records, back comes PissyChrissy with more refrains from the Chicken Little Chorus Cargo Cult.



Yes it's the earth doing what it does every year around this time. Let's give it a name.....
How about SUMMER?


----------



## bobgnote (Jul 1, 2012)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Big Fitz said:
> 
> 
> > After months and months of nothing about records, back comes PissyChrissy with more refrains from the Chicken Little Chorus Cargo Cult.
> ...



_*Bigretardedqueenofcalinkey*, how about if you show us how good zombies are, at target practice?_






_In other news, zombies couldn't figure out what happens with FIRE, so some of 'em torched, in the heat wave.

*Pig Shitz* has a fez, *bigretard*!  What the hell kind of helmet is that, for a zombie?  Don't try to think, if your brain hurts:_


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 1, 2012)

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qga5eONXU_4]Alice Cooper-Schools out - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## Cowman (Jul 1, 2012)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Big Fitz said:
> 
> 
> > After months and months of nothing about records, back comes PissyChrissy with more refrains from the Chicken Little Chorus Cargo Cult.
> ...



How about you get your head out of your ass and look as a whole the temperature trends of 2012. Also go back and look at 2011, 2010, etc. Don't just look at the United States. Look at the entire fucking world. Look at land temperatures and look at ocean temperatures.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 1, 2012)

Cowman said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Big Fitz said:
> ...



That might be worth discussing if it global warming wasn't politically motivated and full of deception. I never forgot about the data being destroyed before peer review could take it's course so try again.


----------



## Cowman (Jul 1, 2012)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Cowman said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



It's politically motivated because people like you make it out to be politically motivated. Instead of accepting the mountains of peer reviewed studies and other sources of evidence out there conducted by legions of the world's smartest climate scientists, you guys instead choose to fight it because you're upset that there are ramifications which require real world action.

It's not enough to just accept that something so potentially catastrophic is happening. Governments need to work together to counteract those changes, and steer humanity onto a better path. But because it extends beyond the scope of your mind to comprehend that humans can have a huge effect on the environment, and because tackling the issue involves money and doing more than sitting on your fat ass all day long eating sour cream & onion potato chips, you're vehemently against it.


What? You expected that something like Global Warming wouldn't require any money? No money for research? No money for policy changes? No money for action? It costs money to wipe your fucking ass, why wouldn't something so serious require funding?

Things change bigreb. Things aren't always done as they used to be. Industries have adapted and grown over countless new advances and obstacles in history, and this is no different.

Why don't you think about your fucking future generations for a change, instead of only about yourself. Jesus isn't going to come and clean up after you.


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 1, 2012)

Cowman said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Big Fitz said:
> ...




NOBODY GETS HYSTERICAL ABOUT THIS SHIT s0n...............EXCEPT THE K00KS.


----------



## bobgnote (Jul 1, 2012)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> That might be worth discussing if it global warming wasn't politically motivated and full of deception. I never forgot about the data being destroyed before peer review could take it's course so try again.



_Come on, *bigretardedqueenofcalinkey*!  Global warming isn't just a theory.  Reports and studies back up, how our planet would be much cooler, if not for the greenhouse effect, where atmospheric molecules of three atoms or more contribute, to a blanketing effect, so infrared radiation is trapped, in the atmosphere.

Global warming isn't "politically motivated," you English-as-a-retard-rant-media fucktard.  You forgot to link to any reports of destroyed data or even to fake "Lord" Monckton, who isn't a real peer, you queer!

Global warming SCIENCE isn't "politically motivated," redstate dumbshit!  The Koch Brothers funded a study, which found the studies and the SCIENCE is valid.  So what is your problem, except you are a queer, stupid zombie, who keeps his head extra warm, up his own asshole, so why hassle the warming issues? 

I guess seeing the fire season really get going, before Summer has even had a chance to dry the cover must be a tough phenomenon, to observe and assess, for a queer, goddamn zombie shithead, on a red-neck.

What is going to deceive you, *bigretard*?  News reports, about your ass being on fire?  That might be a symptom, either of your usual lying or of global warming, or you let your Log Cabin Club buddies get too close, to your rat-hole, and they set fire, to you.

Shit, you are stupid!  Does being big help, at all?  Read the story, again, DD from calinkey:_

Pondering a Link Between Forest Fires and Climate Change - NYTimes.com

_Here's a little retard-zombie, trying to think.  What makes you think big zombie retards do any better?_


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 1, 2012)

bobgnote said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > That might be worth discussing if it global warming wasn't politically motivated and full of deception. I never forgot about the data being destroyed before peer review could take it's course so try again.
> ...



U mad cause school's about to start again?


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 1, 2012)

Cowman said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Cowman said:
> ...



You're pissed because you can't defend the lies of obama so you lash out without reason. pity.


----------



## Cowman (Jul 1, 2012)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Cowman said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



What does Obama have to do with Global Warming? Is he a crucial hinge?


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 1, 2012)

Cowman said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Cowman said:
> ...



He's a big supporter of the theory


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 1, 2012)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Cowman said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...





Actually..........the dolt never even mentioned "climate change" once in his most recent SOTU address. Not a once!!! Oh...and the k00ks were pissed. But they'll still, to a person, vote for him in November.

Like Ive been saying for eons on here..........nobody is caring a shit about climate change in 2012. The country is going to hell in a hand basket and the dolts think people care about this shit..........


----------



## daveman (Jul 1, 2012)

Old Rocks said:


> 10,000 still displaced in raging Colorado wildfire



Oh, if ONLY they'd voted Democrat, there never would have been a fire!


----------



## Cowman (Jul 1, 2012)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Cowman said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



What the fuck does that matter? Start telling me why I should base my belief on global warming on what Obama thinks about it.

I care about what scientists think, retard.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 1, 2012)

Cowman said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Cowman said:
> ...



I don't give a fuck what an agenda pusher thinks even if he calls himself a scientist, retard.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 1, 2012)

skookerasbil said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Cowman said:
> ...



obama doesn't have to mention the words his agenda speaks loud and clear.


----------



## Big Fitz (Jul 1, 2012)

daveman said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> > 10,000 still displaced in raging Colorado wildfire
> ...


We'll ignore the fact that 50 years of "leave it alone and prevent all fires" forest management in a place that requires them for healthy existance had anything to do with it.


----------



## daveman (Jul 1, 2012)

Big Fitz said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Old Rocks said:
> ...


Yup.  You mess with Mother Nature's housekeeping, she gets angry.


----------



## Cowman (Jul 1, 2012)

Big Fitz said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Old Rocks said:
> ...



The forest service has NEVER been about preventing all fires. Controlled burns have always been a part of managing our forests.


----------



## ginscpy (Jul 2, 2012)

Were all the GW kool aid drinkers when there were record freezing winters the past few years.........................

Let me guess - they explain it away by saying extremes in temps is proof of climate change.......................


----------



## IanC (Jul 2, 2012)

ginscpy said:


> Were all the GW kool aid drinkers when there were record freezing winters the past few years.........................
> 
> Let me guess - they explain it away by saying extremes in temps is proof of climate change.......................



didnt you know? _everything_ that happens is evidence of man made climate change. you can change the name and focus of your religion but the old habit of finding the fingerprint of God, oops I mean Man, in every happenstance is hard to break.


----------



## daveman (Jul 2, 2012)

ginscpy said:


> Were all the GW kool aid drinkers when there were record freezing winters the past few years.........................
> 
> Let me guess - they explain it away by saying extremes in temps is proof of climate change.......................



When someone pointed out record cold temps or snowfall, it was dismissed as "weather" and didn't prove anything.

Hot temperatures, of course, are proof that American SUVs are killing Gaea.  

Right, Roxy?


----------



## daveman (Jul 2, 2012)

IanC said:


> ginscpy said:
> 
> 
> > Were all the GW kool aid drinkers when there were record freezing winters the past few years.........................
> ...



warmlist


----------



## IanC (Jul 2, 2012)

daveman said:


> IanC said:
> 
> 
> > ginscpy said:
> ...



that list is out-of-date. Im sure you could add another few hundred, easy


----------



## bobgnote (Jul 2, 2012)

IanC said:


> ginscpy said:
> 
> 
> > Were all the GW kool aid drinkers when there were record freezing winters the past few years.........................
> ...



_God is man, which can make your asshole feel things, Crapforbrains, which is why you lie, and lie, and lie, until your pants are flaming.

Climate forcers, without human intervention:
1. Sun
2. CO2
3. CH4
4. NO2

Climate forcers, with humans defoliating and burning both plant and fossil fuel media:
1. CO2
2. CH4
3. Sun
4. NO2

Humans fucked things up, and you queers won't admit to any of it, since you like how your assholes feel, when you lie and act-up._


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 2, 2012)

bobgnote said:


> IanC said:
> 
> 
> > ginscpy said:
> ...



That doesn't explain why the 1300's global temperatures was hotter then than it is now.


----------



## Meister (Jul 2, 2012)

Temps go up and temps go down....with or without Man


----------



## Meister (Jul 2, 2012)

bobgnote said:


> IanC said:
> 
> 
> > ginscpy said:
> ...



Calm down there, slugger.
Seems your team needs to fudge the numbers to get their desired results.  If they didn't need to, why are they getting caught at it?  That would be a strike against your team.


----------



## Big Fitz (Jul 2, 2012)

Meister said:


> Temps go up and temps go down....with or without Man


Oh you lair!


----------



## bobgnote (Jul 2, 2012)

Meister said:


> Calm down there, slugger.  Seems your team needs to fudge the numbers to get their desired results.  If they didn't need to, why are they getting caught at it?  That would be a strike against your team.



_You wouldn't mind linking to a study or report, with a paste or two, or simply recite some facts, would you?

It seems kinda hot, these days, and all-time high readings are projected, to go up, against all-time low readings, by a ratio, of 50-1, by the end of the century.

There are numbers coming in, all the time.  What "fudge" did you have in mind?  Do you know Pig Shitz, better than I know Pig Shitz?

In the meantime, heat, oceanic acidification, sea level, and extinctions are going to go way up.  You can simply deny something undefined, to encourage your team, like you are zombies vs. plants, or you can make a decent post.  Try again, if you want to.

Your "team" deserves every flame in the book.  If you want to go over why, get it on, ask questions, give answers, post links and graphs, do your thing, Meister._


----------



## Chris (Jul 2, 2012)

According to the agencys data, 41 records have fallen or been tied in the past seven days, and the same number in the past 30 days. Over the past 365 days, 233 all-time records have fallen.

The numbers are equally impressive when it comes to just daily records. On Wednesday, 196 daily high temperature records were topped, increasing the past seven days worth of records to 1,133.  When looking at the past 30 days, the number of broken daily records climbs to 2,359 and -- like mercury breaking through the top of a thermometer -- hits 34,294 over the past 365 days.

Heat wave rolls through the U.S., toppling records - latimes.com


----------



## Old Rocks (Jul 2, 2012)

Ah Chris, it is all doctored data, you know. After all, the folks back east are just participating in mass hysteria when they think it is hotter than normal, when they believe that a thunderstorm has done as much damage as a hurricane. And those alarmists out West. Bitchin' about a few small bonfires. People are just so gullable. 

Look, we will just have to have Senator Inhofe wise them up. Just their imagination.


----------



## Mad Scientist (Jul 2, 2012)

All those cities that contribute to new high temps should pay a tax for the damage they're doing to the environment.

Excuse me, it would be a "penalty"


----------



## Mr. H. (Jul 2, 2012)

If I turn my laptop upside down, I can see an American flag in your avatar.


----------



## flacaltenn (Jul 2, 2012)

Of course records will get broken when the world is slowly warming.. The LATimes is sloppy mixing "records" with "record highs". Such is the sorry state of journalism.. 


But before we all leap to the lifeboats, during  just the past week, there were 147 NEW record Minimum High Temps. (means it was extraordinarily cold.) And for you kids out there --- you'll see how silly counting all the records actually is because if it's COLD in Central Florida, it's gonna be cold in Winter Park, Orlando, Kissimee and 20 places within 100 mile radius.. Take a look... 

http://mapcenter.hamweather.com/records/7day/us.html?c=lowmax

Wonder if the LAtimes included those in the "number of records"...


----------



## Ragnar (Jul 2, 2012)

I might have to go along with the "Warm Mongers" on this one.

I've only lived in Cincinnati for six years but this June 30th, 5:37PM (EST), was the hottest June 30th, 5:37PM (EST) out of any June 30th, 5:37PM (EST) since I moved here and the way the news reported it, far and away the hottest June 30th, 5:37PM (EST) in several decades worth of know temperatures on June 30th, at 5:37PM (EST).

I was checking the mail about then and sweating balls.


----------



## Mr. H. (Jul 2, 2012)

Part of me thinks we're fucked, part of me thinks it's the nature of things and we'll be fine given time. 

And all of me thinks it's party time. Let's break out the booze and have a ball.


----------



## bobgnote (Jul 3, 2012)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> bobgnote said:
> 
> 
> > _Climate forcers, without human intervention:
> ...



_Dang me, if'n *bigretardedqueenofNORTHCALINKEY* didn't load a graph and then refer to the 1300s, without a link or another graph, with the 1300s clearly plotted.

Some people call the cycles shown Milankovitch cycles, *bigretard*.  See how the temperatures saw-tooth their way down, over many thousands of years, but shoot the hell up, over just a few thousand years?  CO2 is forcing that.  The CO2 plot is relatively steady, while temperatures jump around it.

When CO2 gets to 180 ppm, it heads UP, and when it gets to 280 ppm, temperatures tend to shoot past, which is probably what happened, in the 1300s, during the Medieval Warming Period.  CO2 wanted to go back down, and so did temperatures, but somebody was fucking with the plants and animals, and by the 1950s, that somebody had chainsaws and loads of automobiles.

That somebody was HUMANS.  So the CO2 won't go down!  The temperatures aren't going down (see how they ALWAYS start back down?), since the temperatures will go way UP, and everybody's shit will burn down, every Spring.

Until you get smart, you will continue to eat wingpunk shit and spit it back out, at other people.  Since the temperatures aren't going to go down, they will go up, at least 4 C, by the end of this century, but I think they'll go up more, since there's a LOT of CH4 out-gassing, into the atmosphere, and something will fuck up the process, which converts that, to CO2 and H2O.  So the methane, which is like 72 times worse than CO2, will stay as CH4, for a lot longer, and the planet will get hot and stay there, or get hotter.

Whatever amount the temperatures go UP, it will be for sure up 2 C, by 2050, which will be the end of all ice, on Greenland.  If you live on the East Coast or NOLA, you get to eat wet shit and swim, for your life, or run for it.

According to one study I just posted, our 100x normal extinction rate will get, to MASS EXTINCTIONS, after 2020, like 2022, and then lots of species die the hell off.  Jellyfish start to take over the oceans.  When the oceans heat enough, bacteria and algae bloom, all the time, anoxic events fuck up any fish that are left, and H2S respirators evolve.

On land, we get more fires, more storms (see how big tornado alley is getting?), and sea level rise fucks people all up.  Expect to see refugees, in your lifetime.  Here's a better graph, than the one you posted, since this one has CO2 concentrations and temperatures, back 400,000 years:_







"Joined the dark side Dookie-boy has.  Lies, deceit, and mistrust are his ways."  

_Hey.  If you want to be a shitty-shyster, with the dork side, you don't have to smarten the fuck up!  Go ahead and be like Count Dookie-boy, who eats shit and dies; see some Clone Wars, if you don't dig science.  Be like President Obamney, who copies that other fuck, named Obamney, or anything else Republican, since he's probably in love, with Hillary, who used to be a Goldwater Girlie.

Clue: see that red line, going way UP, on the RIGHT?  That happens in any graph, which shows CO2, which your better temperature graphs have, since the temperature is getting its shit together, to follow that fucker right up, to a limit, but that limit will be high as hell, higher than in the PETM Extinction, since a lot of CH4 (methane) is also getting out-gassed.

So if you join the dork side, and you've been doing time, over there, you FUCKED UP._

"Cuss your shit out until it turns blue, I will, hmm?  Yesss."  _Guess who!_


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 3, 2012)

bobgnote said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > bobgnote said:
> ...





> didn't load a graph and then refer to the 1300s, without a link or another graph, with the 1300s clearly plotted.



If you look at the year 2007 to the left you will see the graph line is higher that would be the middle ages  showing that it was hotter then than it is now.
Don't like it can't help you.


----------



## bobgnote (Jul 3, 2012)

_Hey, *bigretard:*

You don't have to quote the whole fucking comment train, as a quote in quote and then fuck up, without replying to any defect in your original comment or to the reply, part of the quote in quote.

I'll give you, that 2007 label is likely right after the Medieval Warming, but you are trying to play with science, with your stupid head way up your punk asshole.  Get a graph, which looks more like this, with the Minoan Warm Period and the Medieval Warm Period and the Roman Warm Period and the MODERN WARM PERIOD all labeled, without quoting the entire, unedited comment list, which you are not replying to, you deflecting, page-wasting piece of shit:_








_The Minoan Warm Period and the Roman Warm Period and the entire, 10,000-year Holocene thermal maximum are also in your spike, to the left of 2007, *retard*.  So you didn't do what I wanted you to do, which is to go get a more modern graph, so we can see what the fuck you think you are stupidly ranting about, since you are dumb as shit and fucking with science, not reporting or studying, you special-class fucktard._


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 3, 2012)

bobgnote said:


> _Hey, *bigretard:*
> 
> You don't have to quote the whole fucking comment train, as a quote in quote and then fuck up, without replying to any defect in your original comment or to the reply, part of the quote in quote.
> 
> ...



More stupid shit from drepy the clown.


----------



## bobgnote (Jul 3, 2012)

_See any science you like, *bigretard*?

Got more where that came from.  Say, you seem to be having trouble, with the basics.  What's it like, to be the living-dead proof, over and over, how the white race is so fucked up, the gene pool ain't worth a swim, on a hot, Summer day?_


----------



## daveman (Jul 3, 2012)

IanC said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > IanC said:
> ...



Internet link lists not being updated is a sign of global warmercoolering.


----------



## daveman (Jul 3, 2012)

bobgnote said:


> _See any science you like, *bigretard*?
> 
> Got more where that came from.  Say, you seem to be having trouble, with the basics.  What's it like, to be the living-dead proof, over and over, how the white race is so fucked up, the gene pool ain't worth a swim, on a hot, Summer day?_



Do you get paid by the comma, you racist retard?


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 4, 2012)

bobgnote said:


> _See any science you like, *bigretard*?
> 
> Got more where that came from.  Say, you seem to be having trouble, with the basics.  What's it like, to be the living-dead proof, over and over, how the white race is so fucked up, the gene pool ain't worth a swim, on a hot, Summer day?_



You supporting global warming and being an idiot is proof enough global warming is a fraud.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 4, 2012)

daveman said:


> bobgnote said:
> 
> 
> > _See any science you like, *bigretard*?
> ...



He's preparing for going back to school, he thinks it might impress his teacher.


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 4, 2012)

daveman said:


> bobgnote said:
> 
> 
> > _See any science you like, *bigretard*?
> ...





DAve bro.................

This basically is what you are looking at with this Bobnote guy................









You'd be angry and miserable too.................


----------



## Old Rocks (Jul 4, 2012)

Record Events for Wed Jun 27, 2012 through Tue Jul 3, 2012
Total Records:
3505

Rainfall:
177

High Temperatures:
2234

Low Temperatures:
223

Lowest Max Temperatures:
84

Highest Min Temperatures:
787

HAMweather Climate Center - Record Events for The Past Week - Continental US View

*It looks like 3/4 of the states have the measles.*


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Jul 4, 2012)

Adopt AGW as your one true scientific faith


----------



## daveman (Jul 4, 2012)

Old Rocks said:


> Record Events for Wed Jun 27, 2012 through Tue Jul 3, 2012
> Total Records:
> 3505
> 
> ...


It's called "weather".


----------



## daveman (Jul 4, 2012)

CrusaderFrank said:


> Adopt AGW as your one true scientific faith


----------



## Big Fitz (Jul 4, 2012)

daveman said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> > Record Events for Wed Jun 27, 2012 through Tue Jul 3, 2012
> ...


but but but... weather isn't climate when it doesn't support our theory!!!!!!


----------



## bobgnote (Jul 4, 2012)

daveman said:


> bobgnote said:
> 
> 
> > _See any science you like, *bigretard*?
> ...



_I don't even get paid, to put commas where they belong, which is in front of any prepositions, you cocksucking, English-as-a-punk-rant, DDD queerboy.  FYI, if I were a "racist," I'd be a dumbshit climate-change denier.  As it is, I indulge relevant racialist issues, such as how all you deniers also tend to be really stupid white people.

See the difference, you illiterate DDD-fucktard?

So, how does it feel, to be living-dead proof, how the gene pool of the white race has completely failed?  When weather trends are analyzed, the results suggest climatic trends, you Log Cabin Club wannabe:_

Winter of 2012 Named 4th-Warmest for US | Unusual Weather & Climate | Temperature Records | LiveScience

Warmer Climate To Deprive South Africa of Water | LiveScience

_That website usually has a lot of skeptics, but those articles seem to indicate climate interest.  Meanwhile, the hot weather is part of a trend, which indicates climate._


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 4, 2012)

daveman said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> > Record Events for Wed Jun 27, 2012 through Tue Jul 3, 2012
> ...



Well Dave their is this theory that the core of the earth is heating up, but that is so 2012


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 4, 2012)

bobgnote said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > bobgnote said:
> ...


Hey bitch you can be a warmer and a racist. You're a good example of one.


----------



## daveman (Jul 4, 2012)

Big Fitz said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Old Rocks said:
> ...


If it weren't for double standards, they'd have no standards at all.


----------



## Big Fitz (Jul 4, 2012)

daveman said:


> Big Fitz said:
> 
> 
> > daveman said:
> ...


Yes well, two standards is twice as gooder, right?


----------



## daveman (Jul 4, 2012)

bobgnote said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > bobgnote said:
> ...


You're good.  I'm THIS close to registering Democrat and buying a Chevy Volt.


----------



## daveman (Jul 4, 2012)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Old Rocks said:
> ...


That's impossible.  CO2 from American SUVs can't get to the earth's core, silly.


----------



## daveman (Jul 4, 2012)

Big Fitz said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > Big Fitz said:
> ...


Doubleplusgood!


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 4, 2012)

daveman said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > daveman said:
> ...



Are you sure?  isn't there a vacuum system in the volcanoes?  When one goes of what it's doing is pulling heat from the other side of the earth\?


----------



## bobgnote (Jul 4, 2012)

_Let's just lay some of this down, even though similar material has been posted.  We should expect spammers to come along and try to zombie up some skepticism.  We are interested in CLIMATE CHANGE, so let's shove this in:_

9 of 10 Most Recent Years Indicate Record High Temperatures Worldwide

9 of the 10 warmest years on record occurred since 2000. Warmer temperatures and more radical and unstable weather patterns cannot be ignored. Something is going on out there and this week we experienced the radiation from massive solar flares. All of this, and we consider what happens if the ice caps at the poles do continue to melt and shrink. Will sea levels continue to rise and endanger people in coastal areas?

Then we read that indeed, the oceans have been measured and have increased temperature world wide. Explorers tell us that glaciers are melting at a rapid pace, unlike ever documented before.

Not only is the ocean hotter. So is the land, air and throughout the world, reports confirm what we all have suspected. It is hotter out there. In New Hampshire, while Republicans were fighting their Presidential primary season, there was little or no snow. Ponds that were once iced over this time of year, were attracting fishermen. In the Sangre de Cristo Mountains of New Mexico, what once were white snow and ice covered mountains, in January, are largely bare of snow, with only tiny spots of glaciers left at the very tops.

The global average temperature last year was the ninth-warmest since records have been kept. Most scholars believe it is because of greenhouse gases. NASA scientists agree with this evaluation.

A separate report from the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) said the average temperature for the United States in 2011 as the 23rd warmest year on record.

*

The first 11 years of the new century were notably hotter than the middle and late 20th century, according to institute director James Hansen. The only year from the 20th century that was among the top 10 warmest years was 1998.

These high global temperatures come even with the cooling effects of a strong La Nina ocean temperature pattern and low solar activity for the past several years. But in January of 2012, the Sun became active, and on January 25 a huge solar storm sent radiation, hitting the earth and causing some electrical disruptions, cell phone failures, and flight rerouting. 

Some suggested that this is just the beginning, because the sun has drifted into an energy cloud that could "stimulate" and activate more solar activity. The fear mongers are crying that this could lead to a world wide 'grid' failure and mass failure in the world social order. Others, suggest that it will bring (as it is already doing) spotty problems but nothing major. 

But it is a coincidence that it comes during the same period that the Mayan Calendar predicted some kind of world wide disaster. The Maya's were students and worshippers of the sun. All of this brings to mind how vulnerable our word is, and how separated 90% of humanity is from basic sources of food, water, and energy. Perhaps the wise among us should consider this, and consider a return to the essential elements of survival. 

Saneh Boothe's "Cornucopia Project" has been writing on this subject for years (see: Buy Greenhouses at Cornucopia Enterprise LLC.). But the "Green-fire Times" of Santa Fe, New Mexico acknowledged that it is publishing the EDEN GARDEN PROJECT, designed by Saneh T. Boothe, representing an answer to basic security needs and solutions for homeland security in the event of national disaster or other disruptions in our power, grid, transportation, water and food supply.

---------------------

_Mayans, huh?  I wonder if they were like Leonardo da Vinci, who drew a lot of pictures, forecast inventions, of the 20th Century, and also, he predicted global climate disaster.  But Leo never drew a picture, of a CHAINSAW._


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 4, 2012)

and thousands of record lows...............assholes!!!!


NOAA: Summer 2009 was 34th coolest on record; thousands of low temp records set | ThorntonWeather.com




*HAPPY

4TH 

OF

JULY


S0NS!!!*


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 4, 2012)




----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 4, 2012)

7 MINUTES OF PURE FAILS - YouTube


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 4, 2012)

Global warming explained





Glad I could help anyone know where I can find an ark?


----------



## daveman (Jul 4, 2012)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...


Maybe the eeeeevil BIGOIL is pumping CO2 into the wells as they pump the oil out.

I wouldn't put it past them.  The bastards.


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 4, 2012)

bobgnote said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > bobgnote said:
> ...


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 4, 2012)

daveman said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > daveman said:
> ...



Actually mother nature is getting old and when you get old you got to turn the heat up, She hit the thermostat because she's a little cold.


----------



## Big Fitz (Jul 4, 2012)

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wbfgVEk-mxQ]Heat Miser Song - The Year Without a Santa Claus 1974 - YouTube[/ame]

Well look who just showed up!


----------



## bobgnote (Jul 4, 2012)

daveman said:


> You're good.  I'm THIS close to registering Democrat and buying a Chevy Volt.



_You're retarded, and so are your punk-ass, stupid, white-trash geeks, who spammed up this thread, with you.  Since you suck, you think your sarcasm is somehow clever, like maybe you are writing shit at a Democrat.

Nobody I know is going to go register as a Democrat.  If they did that, they are keeping it to themselves, since I tend to criticize black Obamney, pretty well.  If you would REALLY buy a Volt, wait until 2013 models come out:_

Higher gas mileage, electric range for 2013 Chevy Volt | The Car Tech blog - CNET Reviews


----------



## Zander (Jul 4, 2012)

News flash: Summer is hot.


----------



## daveman (Jul 4, 2012)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...


When 4.5 billion years you reach, look as good you will not.  /Yoda


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 4, 2012)

bobgnote said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > You're good.  I'm THIS close to registering Democrat and buying a Chevy Volt.
> ...



You're an idiot little boy but don't let us stop you from providing comic relief to this thread.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 4, 2012)

daveman said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > daveman said:
> ...



Mother nature isn't a day over 6000 You know how women love to lie about their age.


----------



## daveman (Jul 4, 2012)

bobgnote said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > You're good.  I'm THIS close to registering Democrat and buying a Chevy Volt.
> ...


_






bobgnote said:



			If you would REALLY buy a Volt, wait until 2013 models come out:
		
Click to expand...

_


bobgnote said:


> Higher gas mileage, electric range for 2013 Chevy Volt | The Car Tech blog - CNET Reviews


I wouldn't have one of the pieces of crap, you racist retard.


----------



## daveman (Jul 4, 2012)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...


----------



## bobgnote (Jul 4, 2012)

daveman said:


> bobgnote said:
> 
> 
> > daveman said:
> ...



_What race do you think I am, which makes me a "racist," *DDD*?

You missed, with the "retard" allegation.  It seems stupid, uneducated you and your stupid, uneducated friends all like to spam an environment thread.  It seems you are all fucktardy white males.  It seems you can't observe, paste, link, or discuss.  It seems the lot of you are from similar mental institutions.  But hey, I know the real problem is you are all dumbfuck white boys, proving whitey's gene pool is polluted.

How does that observation make me a "racist" OR a "retard," *DDD*?  What race do you think I am?  Not the shit-for-brains-brand white race, I must say!  Go ahead and guess, *DDD*.  Do you think I'm African American or something?

I'm not a spammer, or stupid, or racist.  I'm not like you and your tard-posse, at all._


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 4, 2012)

bobgnote said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > bobgnote said:
> ...



I don't give a fuck what race you are, you are a racist.


----------



## daveman (Jul 4, 2012)

bobgnote said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > bobgnote said:
> ...


I don't give a shit what you are.  Your words prove you're a racist moron.  

Now stamp your feet and use more bad language!  Chicks dig that.  No, really!


----------



## flacaltenn (Jul 4, 2012)

bobgnote said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > bobgnote said:
> ...



I think you're really entertaining bobbygee.. I'm hoping this whole act is just one of your talents.. You can see why I'm convinced that this act is the work of a frustrated sock. Posting advanced journal articles and following them with 232 words not allowed on TV -- it don't exist in Nature.. 

C'mon -- you ARE Johnny Knoxville ain'tcha?


----------



## Peter321 (Jul 4, 2012)

You have too much links..........I think..


----------



## bobgnote (Jul 5, 2012)

_Nobody invited the fucktards to a July 4th picnic.  Or was it just too hot outside, so you guys stayed inside, typing a shitload, which proves how stupid you are?

Did you type even MORE, suggesting the gene pool of the white race has a cracked bottom?

Duh, yup._


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Jul 5, 2012)

By manipulating the data, we can prove CO2 is warming the planet.

No, really.


----------



## bobgnote (Jul 5, 2012)

_*Sucksassandballs*, get out the gags.  Scientists predict record highs will outnumber record lows, 20-1, by 2050, and by 50-1, by the end of the century._


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 5, 2012)

CrusaderFrank said:


> By manipulating the data, we can prove CO2 is warming the planet.
> 
> No, really.


Yes they can and have done so.


----------



## bobgnote (Jul 5, 2012)

_By looking at the posts of all kinda retarded white boys, any observer may conclude the bottom of the caucasian gene pool has a *bigretardedcrack*, in the bottom._


----------



## Meister (Jul 5, 2012)

bobgnote said:


> _By looking at the posts of all kinda retarded white boys, any observer may conclude the bottom of the caucasian gene pool has a *bigretardedcrack*, in the bottom._



When you resort to this kind of retorts, everyone knows you had your ass handed to you.  just sayin....


----------



## bobgnote (Jul 5, 2012)

_Oh, I get it.  You morons aren't even insisting the sun is responsible for warming the planet.

So when somebody notices the CO2 concentration is 120 ppm higher, than at any time, in the last 650,000 years, and when somebody notices CO2 forced all the cycles of warming and cooling, about 100,000 years long, you guys have some kind of issue, which denies the greenhouse effect exists.

When somebody notices atmospheric molecules, with three or more atoms contribute to the greenhouse effect, or the planet would be really cold, you fucktards invite all your stupid, white friends, to spam up environment threads, at USMB.  Got any other tricks?  Play any basketball?

When somebody sings, "Texas chainsaw massacree, took my baby, away from me . . .," you hyper-aggressive shit-bitches won't admit people picked up chainsaws and drove around, in cars, to drastically raise CO2 concentrations, particularly, since the 1950s.

When somebody notices CO2-induced warming caused rampant out-gassing, of CH4 and more CO2, from warming lands and waters, you idiots without a July 4th picnic to go to somehow missed the boat, at figuring out, how global warming will accelerate, past tipping points, to become RUNAWAY GLOBAL WARMING.  If humans don't re-green the planet, the planet will kill a lot of humans, while all kinds of species become extinct, in Mass Extinction Event 6, which will probably challenge the P/T Extinction, for the number one spot, as all-time leading killer event, in geologic history.

Really!  Do you fabulously stupid white boys ever get any pussy?  Did you make a little DDD, with Tiny Shitter, or Popo C-word, or one of the other really stupid white girls, who post at USMB?  I bet you didn't get invited to their picnics.  Good thing.  You are all stupid, white bitches._


----------



## Big Fitz (Jul 5, 2012)

CrusaderFrank said:


> By manipulating the data, we can prove CO2 is warming the planet.
> 
> No, really.


Seems legit.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 5, 2012)

Meister said:


> bobgnote said:
> 
> 
> > _By looking at the posts of all kinda retarded white boys, any observer may conclude the bottom of the caucasian gene pool has a *bigretardedcrack*, in the bottom._
> ...



He's knows it


----------



## bobgnote (Jul 5, 2012)

Meister said:


> bobgnote said:
> 
> 
> > _By looking at the posts of all kinda retarded white boys, any observer may conclude the bottom of the caucasian gene pool has a *bigretardedcrack*, in the bottom._
> ...



_TeeHee, it's *Meister* with the scholarly reply.  When I made the observation a lot of really demented white people were not only ignoring science, but they were also posting a lot of really stupid comments on USMB, I was thorough.  The people spamming up skeptic-media are stupid, white, and aggressive.

Here is the updated list of their deficiencies, just sayin' . . ._

1. poor English US usage
2. no general science education or aptitude
3. no IQ
4. no genetic variance (skeptics are all white people, who are DDD)
5. inability to understand how atmospheric molecules of three atoms or more contribute to the greenhouse effect, or the planet would be cold
6. inability to understand GHG concentrations are increasing, forcing temperatures UP
7. inability to understand CH4 is out-gassing, to force RUNAWAY GLOBAL WARMING
8. inability to understand oceanic acidification
9. inability to understand cars and chainsaws

_There's bound to be all kinds of psycho-sociopathic problems, too, so you sort 'em out.  When you don't like science and you post at science threads, you are making an ass out of yourself.  When you are part of a posse, which consists of nothing but white trashers, that shows a trend.  Just sayin' . . .  so who is responsible, for the awesome epic fail, of the local white people, Darth Vader-daddy?  

When your interest in science is limited, to how to get Gomer and Goober to whip up test-tube babies, white people in a posse deserve, to get outed.  I ain't proud.  Just sayin' . . .  

*Meister*, does your occasional interest in an environment thread mean *Oddball* is due, to post Grandpa Jones, again?_


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 5, 2012)

bobgnote said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> > bobgnote said:
> ...



You're still a racist piece of shit.


----------



## Meister (Jul 5, 2012)

bobgnote said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> > bobgnote said:
> ...



Just look at the Farmers Almanac, dude.


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 5, 2012)

bobgnote said:


> _*Sucksassandballs*, get out the gags.  Scientists predict record highs will outnumber record lows, 20-1, by 2050, and by 50-1, by the end of the century._





The operative word of fAiL is "predict". Dopes are always wrong and everybody knows it. And even if they're right dumbass, what do we do then? All drive those gay SMARTCARS tomorrow?

Dont think its happening s0n.............


----------



## bripat9643 (Jul 5, 2012)

bobgnote said:


> So when somebody notices the CO2 concentration is 120 ppm higher, than at any time, in the last 650,000 years, and when somebody notices CO2 forced all the cycles of warming and cooling, about 100,000 years long, you guys have some kind of issue, which denies the greenhouse effect exists.




The problem with your argument is that nobody "noticed" that.  The rise in the concentration of CO2 came after the onset of the warm periods, not before.

How does it feel to be so damn stupid?


----------



## daveman (Jul 5, 2012)

bobgnote said:


> _Oh, I get it.  You morons aren't even insisting the sun is responsible for warming the planet.
> 
> So when somebody notices the CO2 concentration is 120 ppm higher, than at any time, in the last 650,000 years, and when somebody notices CO2 forced all the cycles of warming and cooling, about 100,000 years long, you guys have some kind of issue, which denies the greenhouse effect exists.
> 
> ...


----------



## bobgnote (Jul 5, 2012)

_The operative media, for predicting rising temperatures are several.

We know what the solar cycles are.  We know ENSO.  We know CO2 and CH4 are both increasingly evident, in the atmosphere, which will trigger runaway global warming.

Only really dumbfuck white boys, like *sucksassandballs* and his posse would try to pretend the temperatures aren't going up, and then, dumbfuck will pretend what is happening doesn't hurt, already._


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 5, 2012)

Chris said:


> According to the agencys data, 41 records have fallen or been tied in the past seven days, and the same number in the past 30 days. Over the past 365 days, 233 all-time records have fallen.
> 
> The numbers are equally impressive when it comes to just daily records. On Wednesday, 196 daily high temperature records were topped, increasing the past seven days worth of records to 1,133.  When looking at the past 30 days, the number of broken daily records climbs to 2,359 and -- like mercury breaking through the top of a thermometer -- hits 34,294 over the past 365 days.
> 
> Heat wave rolls through the U.S., toppling records - latimes.com



Turn off your computer, you're melting the planet!!!


----------



## whitehall (Jul 5, 2012)

WE DIDN'T FREAKING DO IT. AMERICA DIDN'T CAUSE IT. THERE IS NO SUBSTITUTE FOR FOSSIL FUEL America is in hock up to it's ears to oil producing countries. There is no substitute for fossil fuel. Windmills are a joke and a roof full of solar panels might give you a couple of hot showers but you won't get back the money you invested for twenty years. If you lefties really care about the US, can the global warming crap, buy a Chevy Volt and shut the fuk up while the rest of us concentrate on getting the US back on it's economic feet.


----------



## flacaltenn (Jul 5, 2012)

whitehall said:


> WE DIDN'T FREAKING DO IT. AMERICA DIDN'T CAUSE IT. THERE IS NO SUBSTITUTE FOR FOSSIL FUEL America is in hock up to it's ears to oil producing countries. There is no substitute for fossil fuel. Windmills are a joke and a roof full of solar panels might give you a couple of hot showers but you won't get back the money you invested for twenty years. If you lefties really care about the US, can the global warming crap, buy a Chevy Volt and shut the fuk up while the rest of us concentrate on getting the US back on it's economic feet.



Actually -- they are more frightened of nuclear power which would end this whole debate about CO2 -- then they are about global warming.. That should tell you something.. When you see the warmers DEMANDING a couple hundred nuclear plants -- THEN they're feeling a crisis..


----------



## bobgnote (Jul 5, 2012)

bripat9643 said:


> bobgnote said:
> 
> 
> > So when somebody notices the CO2 concentration is 120 ppm higher, than at any time, in the last 650,000 years, and when somebody notices CO2 forced all the cycles of warming and cooling, about 100,000 years long, you guys have some kind of issue, which denies the greenhouse effect exists.
> ...



_*Buttpunk9643*, remember what happens, when science is an issue.  We look at a graph:_







_In THIS graph, you see how the CO2 is relatively steady, which it was, for the last 650,000 years, but all we need to see is the last 450,000 years, of CO2 and temperature.  The red line is CO2 concentration, while temperature is blue.

In all time, up to about the last 10,000 years, which is when humans evolved civilization, cycles are based, on how CO2 always moves, from 180 ppm, to shoot up, to 280 ppm, and when the system is ready, CO2 moves gradually down, while temperature zigs and zags, around the more stable CO2 decrease, over 80K-100K years.

The reason for more and merrier zigs and zags by temperature is_ CO2 is the forcing factor, *buttpunk*.

_If temperature were the forcer, at the peaks and troughs, temperature would initiate the long-term moves up or down, and CO2 would zig and zag, around steadier temperature.

But you happen to be a retard, so you don't learn even simple shit, like that, anyway.  You can find this graph, at known skeptic-site wattsupwiththat.com, so eat shit.

Say, does *buttpunk* retardo know how to get over, to the fucking RIGHT?  

That's where the red CO2-line goes WAY UP, toward 400 ppm, way past the usual Pleistocene-Holocene maximum, of 280 ppm, since in a split-second of geologic time, humans got out the chainsaws and went riding around, in cars.  

That line will get to 1000 ppm, and your ass will be dead or on fire, by the time you figure out WTF, since you are about the stupidest white boy, ever to walk into a wall.  I probably had to explain this to you at least once, already, since you tardy, white skeptic-trash are so busy sucking each others' balls, you don't read posts or links or reports or studies.  You just type shit and post smilies and pictures of shit.

Since you are a wingnutty fucktard of a *buttpunk*, why don't you tell us a story, about that number, on your handle, since it's about three digits too many, to be your IQ?_


----------



## flacaltenn (Jul 5, 2012)

<<bobgnote>>



> The reason for more and merrier zigs and zags by temperature is CO2 is the forcing factor, buttpunk.



Except when it isn't ButtPunk..

Don't know. I've blown up the graph for you.. I've placed circles and arrows on the 6 or 8 events where CO2 FOLLOWS TEMP -- but you are incapable of interpretating this in a LITERAL mathematical fashion.. I gave up -- and now I can ignore you whenever you post it... 

Until you acknowledge that you see what I told you exists --- I've got to think retarded and whole lot of wasted money on your education....

That and the fact that tree rings and ice cores are NOT excellent sensors. And the time resolution is subject to some wild ass guesses and systematic errors anyway. Which is why I don't rely on LITERAL readings of the proxy data for my beliefs..


----------



## bobgnote (Jul 6, 2012)

flacaltenn said:


> <<bobgnote>>
> 
> 
> 
> ...



_*Fatass*, the CO2 always initiates the major up or down trends.  The temperature always zigs and zags more, around the CO2, even if temps and CO2 are both jerking the plants, which jerks the CO2, which FORCES the temperature, until some equilibrium is reached.  You mentioned eras not on the graph and circled shit, which wasn't a peak or a trough, since you are and were a moron, with your head up your ass.

The proxy data always have to use proxy data sources, *Fatass*.  Sorry about our luck.  You are queer, retarded, and aggressive, and your boy *buttpunk9643* is your cock-sucking protege, who likes to face-plant, in classic fail comments.

Then, about 1880, we get to have a lot of instrument data, which gets better, and then we go to the satellite era, about 1990.  We can see the current solar cycle is below average, but temperatures are above average, aren't they, Fatass.  

Are you trying to predict temperatures will go down, when scientists are predicting the trend of many new highs will migrate, to outnumber new lows, by 50-1?  

You are a piece of shit, smearing your boy, *buttpunk9643*.  But he loves it, since he's another stupid, queer white boy, proving white people didn't refresh the gene pool, when they should have._


----------



## daveman (Jul 6, 2012)

bobgnote said:


> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> > <<bobgnote>>
> ...


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 7, 2012)

daveman said:


> bobgnote said:
> 
> 
> > flacaltenn said:
> ...


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 7, 2012)

Evidently, somebody caught Bobnote out doing testing on his homemade emergency ark this past Friday and took some pics.................








Im actually pretty impressed!!! Most musicians are known to be unable to even build a Burger King kids toy so although the design of this guys emergency ark looks a bit crude, it actually looks sea worthy!


----------



## Old Rocks (Jul 7, 2012)

bripat9643 said:


> bobgnote said:
> 
> 
> > So when somebody notices the CO2 concentration is 120 ppm higher, than at any time, in the last 650,000 years, and when somebody notices CO2 forced all the cycles of warming and cooling, about 100,000 years long, you guys have some kind of issue, which denies the greenhouse effect exists.
> ...



You are the one that needs to answer that question, Pattycake. The scientists that study climate and the glacial periods have answered why that was so many times. And there answers have been posted here many times. That you keep making this ignorant statement and question is simply the indication of the depth of your ignorance.

How to explain Milankovitch cycles to a hostile Congressman in 30 seconds


----------



## bobgnote (Jul 7, 2012)

_At the skepticalscience website, starting with the link O.R. posted, Professor Richard Alley of PSU gets on vids, and if you haven't seen a vid of Professor Alley, get to them, since this guy is lucid, and his media is the shizzle.  

The following graphs are offered:_







"Realist" final frame:







"Skeptics" final frame:







_I don't know why the skeptic-graph has a drop, at the last part of the plot.  I also don't know why the escalator theory disproves realism, since the staggered analysis shows how temperature rise is slowly accelerating, not in a classical, constant acceleration, but in a gradual trend, which is liable to peak, once GHG emissions and out-gassing have peaked:_

One of the most common misunderstandings amongst climate "skeptics" is the difference between short-term noise and long-term signal.  In fact, "it hasn't warmed since 1998" is ninth on the list of most-used climate myths, and "it's cooling" is fifth.

This myth stems from a lack of understanding of exactly what global warming is.  The term refers to the long-term warming of the global climate, usually measured over a timescale of about 30 years, as defined by the World Meteorological Organization.  This is because global warming is caused by a global energy imbalance - something causing the Earth to retain more heat, such as an increase in solar radiation reaching the surface, or an increased greenhouse effect.

*

As we discussed in Going Down the Up Escalator, Part 1, it's a very common mistake - even amongst some climate scientists - to confuse short-term climate noise with long-term global warming signal.

-------------------------

_Hmmm.  I think what will happen is temperatures will continue to increase, chasing GHG concentrations, which have not peaked.  GHGs include a lot of freshly out-gassed CH4, which can use up the OH- ions, which help break down the CH4.  So the rise in temperatures is actually accelerating warming, disguised by peaks, such as the high atmospheric temperature, in 1998.

So the step-theory seems useful, to explain how acceleration of warming is not reflected, in a constantly rising hockey stick, but rather in a series of up-turning sub-cycles, which are affected by a host of factors, including solar intensity, ENSO, and dissipation of heat, during melts.  

The melting ice cools surrounding areas, even if overall temperatures are rising.  So when a minor cooling trend shows up, and this happens (see Europe's freeze, Winter 2011), we need to explain this, since the overall trend is toward long-term warming, and right away, since the temperature must adjust, to the rampant out-gassing of CH4 and more CO2, from warming lands and waters.

The blog at ss.com explains solar cycles and ENSO can affect short-term temperature variations, which we all should realize.  The Debunking Handbook claims the ratio of scientists endorsing global warming is more like 97%, rather than the 95%, which I have been posting, without argument.

I don't believe our generation will be still alive, when the acceleration of warming reverts, to simple warming.  We for sure won't see the day temperature levels off, when the high concentrations of GHGs no longer affect the evolving, more universal, pole-to-pole, final temperature scheme.

WE ARE SEEING DIE-OFFS, so we will see, who gets to live.  We will see who survives habitat-destruction, from intensifying storms, floods, droughts, wildfires, desertification, and oceanic trauma._


----------



## flacaltenn (Jul 7, 2012)

Old Rocks said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> > bobgnote said:
> ...



All I saw was a professor talking down to folks that were pressing him for technical details. 

Pretty dam convienient MAGIC to declare that SOLAR effects override CO2 effects in the historical record when the temperature doesn't obey your theory.. But then declare that EVEN THOUGH we have a 300 yr verification of increased TSI --- THAT doesn't matter today.. 

Furthermore -- his bald head example doesn't relate DIRECTLY to the one HOLY number of Global Mean Temperature that is at the heart of this controversy.. We've never measured that accurately during a Milankovich shift -- but my guess is some places get warmer, some get colder. So much for sun-burned bald heads eh? THat's MUCH different than a TSI increase of 1w/m2 over the last couple centuries -- isn't it Roxie? 


I don't many folks ANYWHERE that are denying that it's warming.. Certainly not me. But I'll be damned if I'll sit by and watch the scientific process to determine the CAUSE of the warming get captured by the anti-progress, anti-growth shills for Green Crap...


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 7, 2012)

DE BILT, the Netherlands - While the 2003 heatwave might rate a distinct entry in the record books, it hardly is the most severe summer to ever strike the Netherlands. Modern Dutch man, with his continued quest to seek the sun, is quite capable of dealing with the solar onslaught. In fact, most people considered the Summer of 2003 to be quite pleasant.
Heatwaves in earlier days, not unlike other harsh weather phenomenons, were more intrusive, and often disastrous. These days, many cars and office buildings have air conditioning, beverages are stored in fridges and ice cream makers are a growth industry. Consider the situation in earlier times when 35 degree temperatures or higher resulted in spoiled food and milk, and danger of fire everywhere.
That concludes historical geographer and retired science teacher Jan Buisman, who has dedicated much of his life to recording, investigating and analysing extreme weather conditions. Exact information on the weather in the Netherlands has been recorded since 1706.
Weather chronicler relates of medieval disasters » The Windmill news articles » goDutch


----------



## bobgnote (Jul 7, 2012)

CO2 lags temperature - what does it mean?

_Also at skepticalscience.com are useful explanations, of how solar intensity shifts or orbital shifts sometimes precede temperature changes, which may precede changes in CO2 levels, but most of the temperature changes happen AFTER the level of CO2 changes.

Ten indicators of global temperature:_

Global cooling - Is global warming still happening?


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 7, 2012)

They couldn't get it right in the 70's when they said we were going into a new Ice Age then they change and went Climate change so they could say we were right the climate is changing. Well I agree it does it 4 times a year
It's call Spring summer fall winter and back to spring


----------



## bobgnote (Jul 7, 2012)

flacaltenn said:


> All I saw was a professor talking down to folks that were pressing him for technical details.
> 
> Pretty dam convienient MAGIC to declare that SOLAR effects override CO2 effects in the historical record when the temperature doesn't obey your theory.. But then declare that EVEN THOUGH we have a 300 yr verification of increased TSI --- THAT doesn't matter today..
> 
> ...



_Does anyone not see, why people like Nicholas DDDrapela have to be released, from any Peter Principle-proving job, they scam into?

Does anyone not see, who looked at the skepticalscience.com or another website, with Dana Rohrabacher on video, how Rohrabacher is an asshole?  Does anyone not see, Rohrabacher interrupts anybody, even a professor, like Richard Alley, like a maniac with a car running or a chainsaw, in hand, and then he needs somebody, to graphically illustrate what cars or chainsaws do, TO HIS STUPID FACE, since he won't understand simultaneous release of sequestered CO2 and reduction of CO2 metabolism?

Does anyone who reads or posts to this thread have a problem understanding how CARS and CHAINSAWS have accelerated GHG concentrations?  Yeah because look at all the usual fucktards, posting.

Does anyone who reads or posts here fail, to understand how atmospheric molecules of three atoms or more contribute, to the greenhouse effect, or the planet would be much cooler?  Yeah, *Fatass*, *buttpunk9643*, *CrosstardPunk*, *DaveDDD*, *bigretardedqueenofcalinkey*, *sucksassandballs*, and assorted other really stupid white boys do the epic fail.

Does anybody not see, how the bath-houses had to CLOSE DOWN, FOREVER, after all kinds of maniacs tricked and shot speed, like *sucksassandballs* getting freaky, so they shoved their dose, of HIV, all the way, through AIDS, to death?  Same shit, different day, re global warming denial.

I had to edit this, since who could forget stupid, wingpunk-fucktards, like *Turdsterbugger* and* Pig Shitz*?  Who could forget *Oddball* posting "0" instead of "O," to give *sucksassandballs* a clue, and then *Oddball* posts the late Grandpa Jones on HeeHaw, instead of science?  Who could forget *Meister*, showing what happens, when white boys let the force wander, between settings, on STUPID and CRAZY, to CRAZY and STUPID?  

Who could forget girlie-retards, like *PopoC-word* and *Tiny Shitter*?

Right when you think they need the dark side to cross-breed with them, naaah!  Don't make kids, DDDs.

Who could forget Gomer and Goober making test-tube babies, to plague Andy Griffith, who just died, but now they're crawling around, like little zombie-retards, plaguing the mud-races and everybody else who plays hoop?

At least *Queer Fartbag* admits he's "gay, and stupid."_


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Jul 7, 2012)

Old Rocks said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> > bobgnote said:
> ...



CO2 lags the warming.


----------



## bobgnote (Jul 7, 2012)

_When you are Jesus or Brian Terry, fucktards use your image.  Shit, stay alive, dudes.  Prevent the deeply demented, from copping a feel, on your corpse!_



CrusaderFrank said:


> How to explain Milankovitch cycles to a hostile Congressman in 30 seconds
> 
> CO2 lags the warming.



_What are you trying to prove, Crosstard?  Proxy data lags are explainable, since solar and rotational cycles cause anomalies, but CO2 FORCES the warming, generally.

Does O.R. have to find a site, featuring how to explain reading, to retards?_


----------



## Katzndogz (Jul 7, 2012)

Maybe if we try real hard we can resurrect the hole in the ozone layer hysteria.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 7, 2012)

katzndogz said:


> maybe if we try real hard we can resurrect the hole in the ozone layer hysteria.



5,4,3,2,1........


----------



## flacaltenn (Jul 7, 2012)

CrusaderFrank said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> > bripat9643 said:
> ...



Sometimes -- and only if you believe the time accuracy of the ice cores and tree rings and bug parts that gave us those graphs. There are about as many times (thru the ice ages) that it leads as the number of times it lags.. 

I personally doubt that the time alignment of ALL those independent proxies are good enough to determine the "leader" on every cycle..


----------



## flacaltenn (Jul 7, 2012)

bobgnote said:


> CO2 lags temperature - what does it mean?
> 
> _Also at skepticalscience.com are useful explanations, of how solar intensity shifts or orbital shifts sometimes precede temperature changes, which may precede changes in CO2 levels, but most of the temperature changes happen AFTER the level of CO2 changes.
> 
> ...



Your 1st link to SkepticalScience does NOTHING to explain the occurences where CO2 lags behind temperature.. Just handwaving and obfuscation about feedbacks. There are places in that graph where CO2 IS NOT RISING -- just sitting at relative max -- whilst temperatures are doing a dive. No feedback apparent. 

I would even propose that the ENTIRE GRAPH is f'ed because that's largely a period of ICE ages where the feedback would act much differently than today. You get much different feedbacks when the earth is covered with glaciers and oceans are frozen over.

But I DO congratulate you for finally seeing where the places are in that graph that DO NOT support CO2 as the principal driver of Global Temperature.. AttaBoy Gollum...


----------



## bobgnote (Jul 7, 2012)

_When we go over a graph, on the order of 450,000 years, and the CO2 is steadier, while the temperature zigs and zags, showing a greater variance, in all cases, but which follows the CO2, in all important turnarounds, we have confirmation, how the greenhouse effect is connected to CO2, which forces temperature.

When we find an isolated lead, by temperature, and I didn't find that, skepticalscience did it, and when they link it to a shift in solar intensity, that is their work.  If you want to go over a time period, where you claim CO2 lags temperature, you need to get a link or a graph, since whenever you do that, you fucked up, *Fatass*.  You and your posse are plain shitheads, no more.

If you are in a group of shitheads, you all drive shit, but none of you makes any damn sense, *Fatass*._


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 7, 2012)

bobgnote said:


> _When we go over a graph, on the order of 450,000 years, and the CO2 is steadier, while the temperature zigs and zags, showing a greater variance, in all cases, but which follows the CO2, in all important turnarounds, we have confirmation, how the greenhouse effect is connected to CO2, which forces temperature.
> 
> When we find an isolated lead, by temperature, and I didn't find that, skepticalscience did it, and when they link it to a shift in solar intensity, that is their work.  If you want to go over a time period, where you claim CO2 lags temperature, you need to get a link or a graph, since whenever you do that, you fucked up, *Fatass*.  You and your posse are plain shitheads, no more.
> 
> If you are in a group of shitheads, you all drive shit, but none of you makes any damn sense, *Fatass*._



Have you been sent here to save us from ourselves?


----------



## flacaltenn (Jul 7, 2012)

His mission is to deliver the message that hemp solves everything... He was sent here apparently by the major oil companies to disgust and annoy and give the Green Movement a worse image.


----------



## Old Rocks (Jul 8, 2012)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> They couldn't get it right in the 70's when they said we were going into a new Ice Age then they change and went Climate change so they could say we were right the climate is changing. Well I agree it does it 4 times a year
> It's call Spring summer fall winter and back to spring



Oh my, here we go again. Another cretin repeating that idiocy. What rock did you crawl out from under back in them thar hills, bro? 

The majority, by about a 6 to 1 margin, of scientists in the '70's were predicting warming, not an ice age.


----------



## Old Rocks (Jul 8, 2012)

flacaltenn said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> > bripat9643 said:
> ...



In other words, you will be damned if you will stand by and let anyone tell you that something is differant than the way you think they 'ought to be'.

And it is only in the last decade that people like you would admit that it is warming. In fact, there are still a bunch on this board that are stating that it has been cooling since 1998.

The scientific process that has determined the cause of the warming is available for anyone with any kind of scientific training to read and understand.

The Carbon Dioxide Greenhouse Effect

We have had a good understanding of the effects of GHGs in the atmosphere since 1896. Virtually the whole of the scientific community points this out. There is not one Scientific Society, not one National Academy of Science, and not one major University that contests the fact of AGW. So what you are stating is that nearly every scientist in every nation, irregardless of politics or culture, is in on some kind of conspiracy to slow or stop progress. Nice little tinfoil hat you have

As the effects of the increasing warmth in the atmosphere and ocean mount, and we lose more crops, people are going to begin to appreciate what your kind of 'progess' truly means.


----------



## Old Rocks (Jul 8, 2012)

Make Hay With Corn In Heat Wave Of 2012 - Forbes

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration&#8217;s forecast for July calls for continued hot and dry and that is resulting falling corn crop forecasts. Even though the USDA continues to forecast a total yield of 14.8 billion bushels of corn, private sector firms such as Allendale, Inc. see the crop looking more like 12.9 billion bushels if the bad weather continues.

That potential corn supply problem is compounded by two things. First, the USDA reported that corn stockpiles as of June 1 fell 48% from March 1 to 3.15 billion bushels,  the lowest level since 2004. Second, the demand for corn continues to grow due to a combination of exports, livestock feed and ethanol production according to the National Corn Growers Association.


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 8, 2012)

Old Rocks said:


> Make Hay With Corn In Heat Wave Of 2012 - Forbes
> 
> The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration&#8217;s forecast for July calls for continued hot and dry and that is resulting falling corn crop forecasts. Even though the USDA continues to forecast a total yield of 14.8 billion bushels of corn, private sector firms such as Allendale, Inc. see the crop looking more like 12.9 billion bushels if the bad weather continues.
> 
> That potential corn supply problem is compounded by two things. First, the USDA reported that corn stockpiles as of June 1 fell 48% from March 1 to 3.15 billion bushels,  the lowest level since 2004. Second, the demand for corn continues to grow due to a combination of exports, livestock feed and ethanol production according to the National Corn Growers Association.





These things happen Ray.......go check what the dust storms of the 30's did to crops in middle America. People improvised. Life went on like always. Last I checked, burgers were plentiful in all the decades since.

Imagine the level of hysteria in this forum if there were a similar dust bowl in 2013 or 2015? Need I state the obvious? The warmers sit around waiting for this stuff to pop up on the internet so they can roll it out as further evidence to support their preconceptions. Im not saying they're engineering it..........Im saying they simply believe all this stuff is part of a irreversible trend and are stupidfied by every single weather anomoly.


Less hysterical people are always fully aware of the history stuff................but for those who arent, take a gander into these links and check out the incredible number of weather disasters over the past several hundred years..............floods, drought, hurricanes, typhoons........you name it. Check the death tolls.


FamousDisasters.net ? Dust Bowl - dust bowls, dust bowl 1930's, 1930 dust bowl, great depression dust bowl

List of natural disasters by death toll - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Id say with 100% certainty that warming is happening just like it has in the past..........but this idea that it is due to Co2 is beyond laughable folks. Emerging folklore made up by some brilliant money chasers......the consumate definition of entrepreneur. And what is most compelling? That every single hard core AGW alarmist detests these brilliant people now living in the lap of luxury, compliments of a complex, enormous hoax that they knew enough hysterical types would buy into hook line and stinker..

For me............I cant be so incredibly idealist. How do I feel when I see, like th is past week, 100 million dollar of public monies blowing up in another green ruse while my state government has been forced to cut 3 millions dollar of Medicaid funding to my autistic clients. Every program of mine has lost a vehicle for transportation. My guys get out into the community less....I cant give rasies to my staff who make $11/hour which leads to abuse due to the quality of person I can afford to hire..............and meanwhile, while I see 100 million dollars vanish in a heartbeat over a fucking fake solar company!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I live in the real world s0ns while the k00ks dabble in fantasy science on the internet. You far left guys dont know the real world, hence, your world view.



So ask yourself? Who are the really well intentioned among us??




As Ive said for 35 years, people on the far left have no understanding that there are necessary tradeoffs in pursuit of their utopian k00k visions. They live in here warning about emerging human sufferring while I LIVE it today and every day. Assholes dont realize that public policy decisions are Never, never ever a zero sum game ( and the mental case notion that it is solved by mega-taxing the wealthy). Assholes........................and k00ks. The vision of these morons leads to massive human sufferring my friends, right in front of their faces and the attitude is "meh".


----------



## daveman (Jul 8, 2012)

Old Rocks said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > They couldn't get it right in the 70's when they said we were going into a new Ice Age then they change and went Climate change so they could say we were right the climate is changing. Well I agree it does it 4 times a year
> ...


Funny how the media focus was on cooling, then, huh?


----------



## flacaltenn (Jul 8, 2012)

Old Rocks said:


> Make Hay With Corn In Heat Wave Of 2012 - Forbes
> 
> The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administrations forecast for July calls for continued hot and dry and that is resulting falling corn crop forecasts. Even though the USDA continues to forecast a total yield of 14.8 billion bushels of corn, private sector firms such as Allendale, Inc. see the crop looking more like 12.9 billion bushels if the bad weather continues.
> 
> That potential corn supply problem is compounded by two things. First, the USDA reported that corn stockpiles as of June 1 fell 48% from March 1 to 3.15 billion bushels,  the lowest level since 2004. Second, the demand for corn continues to grow due to a combination of exports, livestock feed and ethanol production according to the National Corn Growers Association.



Our ability to buy food at the market depends more on the poopycock that we are required to grow FOOD that will be burned in our cars rather than a year of bad outcome for crop production..


----------



## flacaltenn (Jul 8, 2012)

Old Rocks said:


> flacaltenn said:
> 
> 
> > Old Rocks said:
> ...



The way it "ought to be" is to have all of your precious "alternatives" knocked back into reality.. The ONLY REASON that TRILLIONS of dollars are being wasted on these fantasies is because of the Global Warming hysteria.. No hysteria -- no Green Crap.. Go ahead, deny it. 

There is no viable plan or "alternative".. Other than the age old leftist goal of hobbling economic expansionism, beating down consumerism, pushing population control, dismantling big business and exercising Economic Imperialism over emerging countries. 

That's really why you're here everyday to cheer on killer hurricanes -- isn't it?


----------



## bobgnote (Jul 8, 2012)

skookerasbil said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> > Make Hay With Corn In Heat Wave Of 2012 - Forbes
> ...



_WTF is somebody doing, letting a MORON minister to the developmentally disabled?  When you let a DDD cop an attitude, at some job he shouldn't ever have, look what happens!  *Sucksassandballs* comes right over to USMB and posts shit, while running a posse, of DDDs, who post shit, where scientific review ought to issue, for people, who want to LEARN.

What you learned, suck, is how NOT to learn.  You brought that over here, for* DaveDDD* and *Pig Shitz* and *bigretardedqueenofcalinkey* and *old numbnuts* to play with:_



daveman said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



_WHAT media focus was on cooling, *DaveDDD*?  You didn't notice media focus since Leonardo da Vinci predicted climate change disasters?  Media focus was on WARMING, until you come up with a link and a paste, which indicates otherwise, but since you are a DDD, following your media daddy, *sucksassandballs*, you didn't read, remember, learn, and think.

*Sucksassandballs* shouldn't be around fucktards at USMB, just because some other DDDs over in New York state have him trying to think, with an old piece of dog shit in a dented skull.  And then there's the meth he seems to like, which doesn't do him much good.  Here's a short article, about global warming:_

History of the greenhouse effect and global warming

Svante Arrhenius (1859-1927) was a Swedish scientist that was the first to claim in 1896 that fossil fuel combustion may eventually result in enhanced global warming. He proposed a relation between atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations and temperature. He found that the average surface temperature of the earth is about 15oC because of the infrared absorption capacity of water vapor and carbon dioxide. This is called the natural greenhouse effect. Arrhenius suggested a doubling of the CO2 concentration would lead to a 5oC temperature rise. He and Thomas Chamberlin calculated that human activities could warm the earth by adding carbon dioxide to the atmosphere. This research was a by-product of research of whether carbon dioxide would explain the causes of the great Ice Ages. This was not actually verified until 1987.

After the discoveries of Arrhenius and Chamberlin the topic was forgotten for a very long time. At that time it was thought than human influences were insignificant compared to natural forces, such as solar activity and ocean circulation. It was also believed that the oceans were such great carbon sinks that they would automatically cancel out our pollution. Water vapor was seen as a much more influential greenhouse gas.

In the 1940's there were developments in infrared spectroscopy for measuring long-wave radiation. At that time it was proven that increasing the amount of atmospheric carbon dioxide resulted in more absorption of infrared radiation. It was also discovered that water vapor absorbed totally different types of radiation than carbon dioxide. Gilbert Plass summarized these results in 1955. He concluded that adding more carbon dioxide to the atmosphere would intercept infrared radiation that is otherwise lost to space, warming the earth.

The argument that the oceans would absorb most carbon dioxide was still intact. However, in the 1950's evidence was found that carbon dioxide has an atmospheric lifetime of approximately 10 years. Moreover, it was not yet known what would happen to a carbon dioxide molecule after it would eventually dissolve in the ocean. Perhaps the carbon dioxide holding capacity of oceans was limited, or carbon dioxide could be transferred back to the atmosphere after some time. Research showed that the ocean could never be the complete sink for all atmospheric CO2. It is thought that only nearly a third of anthropogenic CO2 is absorbed by oceans.

In the late 1950's and early 1960's Charles Keeling used the most modern technologies available to produce concentration curves for atmospheric CO2 in Antarctica and Mauna Loa. These curves have become one of the major icons of global warming. The curves showed a downward trend of global annual temperature from the 1940's to the 1970's. At the same time ocean sediment research showed that there had been no less than 32 cold-warm cycles in the last 2,5 million years, rather than only 4. Therefore, fear began to develop that a new ice age might be near. The media and many scientists ignored scientific data of the 1950's and 1960's in favor of global cooling.

Read more: History of the greenhouse effect and global warming

----------------------

_READ, fucktards.  You can't change your autism or your other types of DDD, by hanging around, together, with your heads up each others' assholes, so you try to get some kind of rolling shove, at people who can think.  You need to learn, from us.

Meanwhile, what this article refers to, re global cooling are ASSHOLES, who wouldn't notice Svante Arrhenius or any other 19th Century guy, who noticed and studied the commonly accepted GREENHOUSE EFFECT, which involves the atmospheric tendencies, of molecules, like CO2, H2O, and CH4, with three atoms, or more.

You notice we can't find any links, to the ASSHOLES, of the 1970s, to whom DaveDDD refers, since those ASSHOLES have been discredited, but DaveDDD still thinks they are the shit.

NO:_

In 1988 it was finally acknowledged that climate was warmer than any period since 1880. The greenhouse effect theory was named and Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was founded by the United Nations Environmental Programme and the World Meteorological Organization. This organization tries to predict the impact of the greenhouse effect according to existing climate models and literature information. The Panel consists of more than 2500 scientific and technical experts from more than 60 countries all over the world. The scientists are from widely divergent research fields including climatology, ecology, economics, medicine, and oceanography. The IPCC is referred to as the largest peer-reviewed scientific cooperation project in history. The IPCC released climate change reports in 1992 and 1996, and the latest revised version in 2001.

Read more: http://www.lenntech.com/greenhouse-effect/global-warming-history.htm#ixzz202y5QBU6

_But ASSHOLES weren't done, yet, even though warming was starting to be accompanied, by CLIMATE CHANGE:_

In the 1990's scientists started to question the greenhouse effect theory, because of major uncertainties in the data sets and model outcomes. They protested the basis of the theory, which was data of global annual mean temperatures. They believed that the measurements were not carried out correctly and that data from oceans was missing. Cooling trends were not explained by the global warming data and satellites showed completely different temperature records from the initial ones. The idea began to grow that global warming models had overestimated the warming trend of the past 100 years. This caused the IPCC to review their initial data on global warming, but this did not make them reconsider whether the trend actually exists. We now know that 1998 was globally the warmest year on record, followed by 2002, 2003, 2001 and 1997. The 10 warmest years on record have all occurred since 1990.

The climate records of the IPCC are still contested by many other scientists, causing new research and frequent responses to skeptics by the IPCC. This global warming discussion is still continuing today and data is constantly checked and renewed. Models are also updated and adjusted to new discoveries and new theory.

So far not many measures have been taken to do something about climate change. This is largely caused by the major uncertainties still surrounding the theory. But climate change is also a global problem that is hard to solve by single countries. Therefore in 1998 the Kyoto Protocol was negotiated in Kyoto, Japan. It requires participating countries to reduce their anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions (CO2, CH4, N2O, HFCs, PFCs, and SF6) by at least 5% below 1990 levels in the commitment period 2008 to 2012. The Kyoto Protocol was eventually signed in Bonn in 2001 by 186 countries. Several countries such as the United States and Australia have retreated.

Read more: http://www.lenntech.com/greenhouse-effect/global-warming-history.htm#ixzz202yqhkTM

--------------------

_Meanwhile, climate change is starting to become evident, as more numerous and severe droughts, desertification, wildfires, storms, floods, sea level rise, and oceanic acidification and anoxia.

Link to your 1970s retards, *DaveDDD*.  They aren't in the media business, anymore._


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 8, 2012)

daveman said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



Yes it is. I'm pissed because I went and got all that cold weather gear, for nothing.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 8, 2012)

Old Rocks said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > They couldn't get it right in the 70's when they said we were going into a new Ice Age then they change and went Climate change so they could say we were right the climate is changing. Well I agree it does it 4 times a year
> ...



What the margin with global warming? 9-1? 
When you educated turds get it right let me know.


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 8, 2012)

bobgnote said:


> skookerasbil said:
> 
> 
> > Old Rocks said:
> ...







As I said..........some of us are navigating in the real world. Others.......... in the land of Oz. A fantasy world supported by the hopelessly naive hystericals of society.


But Im the cretin here though??


100 million for a falied solar company while my company has to cut 3 millon this year for the autistic.





Bankruptcies of Federally Backed Green Energy Companies Continue



The sentiment of every far left asshoile............."Well, it's not my money!!!"


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 8, 2012)

On k00ks and more k00ks................

Nuclear Townhall » Blog Archive » WILLIAM TUCKER: When It Comes to Nuclear and Global Warming, It&#8217;s Cult-vs.-Cult



Cults are gay..............call me a conformist. I never embraced falling over backwards to TRY TO BE A BONIFIDE ODDBALL.



Its called damage....................


----------



## bobgnote (Jul 8, 2012)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



_Here's one site, which claims warmer-scientists are up, by 97% to less than 3%, since some cock-sucking, fence-sitting "scientists" aren't sure if oil companies would pay their salaries, so maybe if they act retarded, it might translate to a paycheck:_

Global Warming and Climate Change skepticism examined

_Here's a good site, with a big page, full of links, to subjects, relating, to HOW TO TALK TO A FUCKTARD:_

How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic: Responses to the most common skeptical arguments on global warming | Grist


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Jul 8, 2012)

bobgnote said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Old Rocks said:
> ...



I talk to fucktards pretty good I talking to you right now and it's working.


----------



## bobgnote (Jul 8, 2012)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> I talk to fucktards pretty good I talking to you right now and it's working.



_Duh, guh-dip!  "I talking to you right now and it's working."

Duh, boop-boop-poop!  Birds are listening to you talk, *bigrefuckingtard*!  Tweet-tweet, you awesome dipshit._


----------



## bobgnote (Jul 8, 2012)

_The heat wave will finally break, for cooler temperatures, IF you are getting T-storms:_

How the heat wave of 2012 stacks up to years past in Columbia - Columbia Missourian

Columbia, MO:  The record-breaking heat wave that hit Columbia this summer has been a struggle for many Columbians, and worsened the drought that has hindered farmers who raise livestock as well as residents who are struggling to care for their lawns and gardens.

Although the city is experiencing a nine-day streak of temperatures reaching 100 degrees and above, it appears that at least temporary relief is in sight. The National Weather Service forecast high temperatures in the mid-90s on Sunday and in the high 80s on Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday. There's even a chance for thunderstorms on Sunday and Monday.

---------------------

Unrelenting heat wave bakes half the US; 30 dead | TheCabin.net - Conway, Arkansas

PHILADELPHIA  Americans dipped into the water, went to the movies and rode the subway just to be in air conditioning Saturday for relief from unrelenting heat that has *killed 30 people across half the country*.

The heat sent temperatures soaring over 100 degrees in several cities, including a record 105 in Washington, St. Louis (106), and Indianapolis (104), buckled highways and derailed a Washington-area train even as another round of summer storms threatened.


----------



## Rat in the Hat (Jul 8, 2012)

bobgnote said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > I talk to fucktards pretty good I talking to you right now and it's working.
> ...


----------



## bobgnote (Jul 9, 2012)

whitehall said:


> WE DIDN'T FREAKING DO IT. AMERICA DIDN'T CAUSE IT. THERE IS NO SUBSTITUTE FOR FOSSIL FUEL America is in hock up to it's ears to oil producing countries. There is no substitute for fossil fuel. Windmills are a joke and a roof full of solar panels might give you a couple of hot showers but you won't get back the money you invested for twenty years. If you lefties really care about the US, can the global warming crap, buy a Chevy Volt and shut the fuk up while the rest of us concentrate on getting the US back on it's economic feet.



Duh, wut duh fuk do fuktards care about?  

_You think of yourself, as some kind of wingnut, I see.  You introduced how "THERE IS NO SUBSTITUTE FOR FOSSIL FUEL," but then you run off and rant, "America is in hock up to it's (sp) ears to oil producing countries," and China, Russia, Japan, and others_.

"There is no substitute," _for brains, asshole.  Get a brain and play with it._  Duh, shut duh fuk up while duh fuktards doodly-doo-doo a shitload and charge for it, duh, like fuk-hos, getting money, fo fuking.

Shut duh fuk up, _you stupid, ranting, trashy asshole_.


----------



## Chris (Jul 9, 2012)

(CNN) -- The mainland United States, which was largely recovering Monday from a near-nationwide heat wave, has experienced the warmest 12-month period since record-keeping began in 1895, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration said Monday.

High temperatures during June also contributed to a record-warm first half of the year, the agency said in its monthly analysis. The heat during the last half of June broke or tied 170 all-time high temperature records in cities across the lower 48 states.

"Temperatures in South Carolina (113 degrees) and Georgia (112 degrees) are currently under review by the U.S. State Climate Extremes Committee as possible all-time statewide temperature records," NOAA said.

The average temperature for the mainland in June was 71.2 degrees -- two degrees above the 20th-century average and the 14th warmest June on record.

Officials: Past 12 months warmest ever for U.S. - CNN.com


----------



## Truthmatters (Jul 9, 2012)

how sad that sceince means nothing to so many here in this country


----------



## Rat in the Hat (Jul 9, 2012)

Truthmatters said:


> how sad that sceince means nothing to so many here in this country



What is "sceince"??


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Jul 9, 2012)

It's local and means nothing, just like the heatwaves in the 30's amiright?


----------



## Leweman (Jul 9, 2012)

so?


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 9, 2012)

bobgnote said:


> whitehall said:
> 
> 
> > WE DIDN'T FREAKING DO IT. AMERICA DIDN'T CAUSE IT. THERE IS NO SUBSTITUTE FOR FOSSIL FUEL America is in hock up to it's ears to oil producing countries. There is no substitute for fossil fuel. Windmills are a joke and a roof full of solar panels might give you a couple of hot showers but you won't get back the money you invested for twenty years. If you lefties really care about the US, can the global warming crap, buy a Chevy Volt and shut the fuk up while the rest of us concentrate on getting the US back on it's economic feet.
> ...












Do we have a CURSING forum??


----------



## bobgnote (Jul 9, 2012)

_The process:_


















_Does this old fuck know rats' asses, or what?_


----------



## whitehall (Jul 9, 2012)

Old Rocks said:


> Ah Chris, it is all doctored data, you know. After all, the folks back east are just participating in mass hysteria when they think it is hotter than normal, when they believe that a thunderstorm has done as much damage as a hurricane. And those alarmists out West. Bitchin' about a few small bonfires. People are just so gullable.
> 
> Look, we will just have to have Senator Inhofe wise them up. Just their imagination.



 Here's the deal, a spike in the temperature, up or down, used to be recorded as a single incident in NOAA's National weather log. The extortionists in the global warming fraternity and the media hypes in the weather business now record every town and village that has access to  a thermometer as a "weather record event". In other words when a single record was once set in New York City back in the 30's now we have a thousand records set based on every thermometer reading from Westchester to Suffolk County. Statistics are wonderful ain't they?


----------



## bobgnote (Jul 9, 2012)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Chris said:
> 
> 
> > According to the agencys data, 41 records have fallen or been tied in the past seven days, and the same number in the past 30 days. Over the past 365 days, 233 all-time records have fallen.
> ...



_*Turdsterbugger*, you are heating up the planet:_








_Nightlife, in Chi-town:_


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 10, 2012)

bobgnote said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Chris said:
> ...



Come on Bob, just tell your Mom that you're gay. You'll feel better.
And it's not like she hasn't known for years.


----------



## TakeAStepBack (Jul 10, 2012)

I think the AGW peddlers should kill themselves and save the planet.


----------



## Old Rocks (Jul 10, 2012)

CrusaderFrank said:


> It's local and means nothing, just like the heatwaves in the 30's amiright?



No, Frankie Boy, it is not local. Three quarters of the last 12 months in La Nina conditions, yet the lowest that the average temperature for this period is higher than the highest average temperature for any period prior to 1998.

UAH Global Temperature Update for June, 2012: +0.37 deg. C « Roy Spencer, Ph. D.


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Jul 10, 2012)

Old Rocks said:


> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> > It's local and means nothing, just like the heatwaves in the 30's amiright?
> ...



Again, it's beyond idiotic to think that you can have an average temperature within .01 degrees for a planet.

What the average temperature for Mars? Jupiter?

And if you're discounting the Dust Bowl of the 30's as "local" you must also discard these results.


----------



## Old Rocks (Jul 10, 2012)

CrusaderFrank said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> > CrusaderFrank said:
> ...



Look, Frankie Boy, we really don't expect an idiot to understand a simple graph. Go back to your hollow moon.


----------



## bobgnote (Jul 10, 2012)

_Read about the double-entry accounting system and sit on a thermometer, *Crosstard*:_


----------



## Rat in the Hat (Jul 10, 2012)

Holy shit!! I REALLY own this clown's brain!! 

And he doesn't even charge me rent for living in it.


----------



## bobgnote (Jul 10, 2012)

TakeAStepBack said:


> I think the AGW peddlers should kill themselves and save the planet.





Toddsterpatriot said:


> Come on Bob, just tell your Mom that you're gay. You'll feel better.  And it's not like she hasn't known for years.




_Let me introduce you two queer ratbags.  Why don't you run off and 69 each other, and don't forget to bite!

*TokeARetroButt*, meet *Turdsterbugger*.  *Turdster*, meet *Toker*.  You can suck each others' ass and balls and watch Idiocracy, on TV.

What is it, with you punks, so you like to parade around, write downlow queer shit, at environment threads, but you never fuck each other?

You are a lot like the dead fags, who shot speed and tricked, to shove their doses of HIV, all the way, through AIDS, to death.  So quit trying to spread your shit._


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 10, 2012)

Just tell her Bob. 

She already knows.


----------



## bobgnote (Jul 10, 2012)

Rat in the Hat said:


> Holy shit!! I REALLY own this clown's brain!!
> 
> And he doesn't even charge me rent for living in it.




_You should run for boss of the Idocracy, rat-patroller.  Yeah._








_Fucktards will breed with rats, to control the America, of the future.  Shoot to kill:_


----------



## Rat in the Hat (Jul 10, 2012)

^^^^

daves enough to repost my sig.


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 10, 2012)

Truthmatters said:


> how sad that sceince means nothing to so many here in this country





Sad??

WTF sweets...........THANK GOD nobody cares. Hardly sad. If the k00k alarmists had any decisionmaking authority, we'd all be fucked. Thankfully, they are kept far, far away from having any impact on public policy outside of a cheesedick EPA ruling here or there. They helped come up with this whole Cap and Trade scam that thankfully withered on the vine and has officially died. And what are the k00ks left with? DICK. Now thier shit is like whistling past the graveyard in 2012. People found out they were going to get clobberred with a doubling of their electric rates and told their representatives to go scratch.


Thankfully for me and my denier pals on here, the extreme nutters still file in here daily to make asses of themselves with the same bomb throwing links people have been seeing for ten years. Ive seen that "Greenhouse Effect" link posted up here 4 billion tmes in the past 4 years and even Obama didnt even mention "climate Change" in his most recent SOTU address..............which when it ended I couldnt help but think of all the k00ks on this board sitting home sucking on another poopsickle and scratching their heads saying, "What the Fuck s0n?"






*W  I  N  N  I  N  G*



And come this November, all this climate crap gets mothballed as America goes full balls into fracking and use of cheap natural gas for energy while solar and wind continue being this fringe element of the energy industry kept alive by the brilliant money chasers taking the k00ks for a ride.


Its called fAiL and it is epic.............


----------



## PratchettFan (Jul 10, 2012)

Chris said:


> (CNN) -- The mainland United States, which was largely recovering Monday from a near-nationwide heat wave, has experienced the warmest 12-month period since record-keeping began in 1895, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration said Monday.
> 
> High temperatures during June also contributed to a record-warm first half of the year, the agency said in its monthly analysis. The heat during the last half of June broke or tied 170 all-time high temperature records in cities across the lower 48 states.
> 
> ...



It doesn't matter.  It is either a trend or it is not.  If it is not, you have nothing to worry about.  If it is, nothing is going to be done about it so you might as well sit back and enjoy the ride.


----------



## Rozman (Jul 10, 2012)

Back when I was growing up in Brooklyn NY we called weather like this...

*SUMMER*


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 10, 2012)

Ummmm................duh


The Watchers - Solar activity increased to high levels - July 4, 2012 summary


http://www.timesonline.com/news/local_news/solar-flare-activity-will-heat-up-over-next-couple-of/article_f2be23e7-45d6-5a36-b47a-5076fa8e4008.html


http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-205_162-57468785/sun-storms-solar-activity-at-fiery-high/


----------



## PratchettFan (Jul 10, 2012)

Rozman said:


> Back when I was growing up in Brooklyn NY we called weather like this...
> 
> *SUMMER*



Really?  You mean when you were growing up more than half of the US was in a moderate to severe drought every summer?  I wonder why that wasn't happening in the rest of the country.


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Jul 10, 2012)

skookerasbil said:


> Ummmm................duh
> 
> 
> The Watchers - Solar activity increased to high levels - July 4, 2012 summary
> ...



Global Warming makes the Sun hotter, sOn!!


----------



## Rozman (Jul 10, 2012)

Why do Libs need someone to blame for whatever happens...
We have had hot Summers in the past.
We have had rainy Summers....


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Jul 10, 2012)

skookerasbil said:


> Ummmm................duh
> 
> 
> The Watchers - Solar activity increased to high levels - July 4, 2012 summary
> ...



....our models show that the Sun has almost no effect on our climate; it's all CO2!


----------



## bripat9643 (Jul 10, 2012)

Truthmatters said:


> how sad that sceince means nothing to so many here in this country



How sad that you believe you know what science is.


----------



## Big Fitz (Jul 10, 2012)

Rat in the Hat said:


> Holy shit!! I REALLY own this clown's brain!!
> 
> And he doesn't even charge me rent for living in it.


apparently you're living there rent free.


----------



## bobgnote (Jul 10, 2012)

_Gee, fucktards are all over the thread!  Hi, fucktards.  See the plot, of solar intensity?  It's going DOWN.  See the plot, for CO2?  Up it goes, forcing temperature UP.

But the solar radiation isn't that great!  Duh, bitches, I seem to recall, how the GREENHOUSE EFFECT is making the planet kind of warm, or it would be a lot colder.  Do you fucktards suppose the science behind global warming is correct?  You betcha!  Temperatures will get forced UP, by more CO2 and by out-gassing CH4, with any other GHGs, chiming in.

Think the planet is kinda warm, now?  When the solar radiance turns back UP, and it will, the Earth will get hot as fuck, and we will all probably be dead or on our way there.  We will lose a lot of human habitat because YOU assholes are really fucking stupid, like many other fucktards.

You are much, much too stupid, to live forever.  Some of you might not live much longer.  Hey, stupid is, as stupid does!_


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Jul 10, 2012)

"That big yellow thing in the Sky? nah, no effect on our climate" -- Warmers


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Jul 10, 2012)

"Record Solar flares AND record heat? Has to be that AGW causes the solar flares, only possible explanation" -- Warmers


----------



## bobgnote (Jul 10, 2012)

_*CrosstardPunk*, almost as smart, as an African American?

*CrosstardPunk*, does he catch on, to double-entry accounting?

*CrosstardPunk*, does he ever just let sucksassandballs do the batshit-crazy tricks?

No, no, and NO!

*Crosstard* is almost as smart, as a piece of fresh dog shit._


----------



## whitehall (Jul 10, 2012)

US History? It was the warmest year in less than three hundred years? There was a freaking glacier covering New York about ten thousand years ago and that's just a drop in the bucket in geological time. What do we do about the "warmest year"? Send more money overseas to compensate for America's decadence? Rely on windmill technology that was out of date 400 years ago? Maybe radical lefties see their chance to overthrow the US government while we are in the "warmest year" and our economy is weak and we have a socialist administration.. Bring it on.


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Jul 10, 2012)

whitehall said:


> US History? It was the warmest year in less than three hundred years? There was a freaking glacier covering New York about ten thousand years ago and that's just a drop in the bucket in geological time. What do we do about the "warmest year"? Send more money overseas to compensate for America's decadence? Rely on windmill technology that was out of date 400 years ago? Maybe radical lefties see their chance to overthrow the US government while we are in the "warmest year" and our economy is weak and we have a socialist administration.. Bring it on.



They can tell us the average temperature for the planet Earth to a 1/100th of a degree and show us how CO2 has increase ocean pH by 30% too!


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Jul 10, 2012)

bobgnote said:


> _*CrosstardPunk*, almost as smart, as an African American?
> 
> *CrosstardPunk*, does he catch on, to double-entry accounting?
> 
> ...



You are disturbed.


----------



## bobgnote (Jul 10, 2012)

CrusaderFrank said:


> bobgnote said:
> 
> 
> > _*CrosstardPunk*, almost as smart, as an African American?
> ...



_You are a fucking moron, constantly proving and proving again, how the white race has a crack in the gene pool.  Are you the fucktard, who suddenly thinks his whole day of shitting up USMB makes him a shrink?  Eat some more shit, *Crosstard*!_


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 10, 2012)

CrusaderFrank said:


> bobgnote said:
> 
> 
> > _*CrosstardPunk*, almost as smart, as an African American?
> ...





indeed.............gay indeed. And the most angry miserable fuck on the whole board!!! But I love meatheads like this being around.............25 mental meltdowns/day. Maybe 30. Since this dolt has come in here, this forum has become a hoot.


----------



## Big Fitz (Jul 10, 2012)

Somebody watches the evening network news and got his marching order.


----------



## bobgnote (Jul 10, 2012)

_Apparently you fucktards think you are some kind of big strain on my sports-oriented life:_


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gM_CSj_TLD0]Retards playing Extreme ping-pong - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## bobgnote (Jul 10, 2012)

_I play tennis, retards.  Help yourself, to the little table!

Psst!  When you DDDs get too close, to the ordinance, we have popos to sack you, for this:_


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EGD8KpTbV-M]Retards playing with explosives (part one) - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 10, 2012)

Hey Fitz...........he's able to post up a vid!!!


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 10, 2012)

Big Fitz said:


> Somebody watches the evening network news and got his marching order.




Hey Fitz bro............yesterday, he was saying that a large contributer to global warming is...........ready for this............"chainsaws"!!!!!!!!

Fucking chainsaws!!!!!


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 10, 2012)

[/IMG]


----------



## Big Fitz (Jul 10, 2012)

skookerasbil said:


> Big Fitz said:
> 
> 
> > Somebody watches the evening network news and got his marching order.
> ...


yep.  I know.  I shook my head and went on.  I just couldn't bring myself to even laugh at him.


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 10, 2012)

Big Fitz said:


> skookerasbil said:
> 
> 
> > Big Fitz said:
> ...





Fitz.......if Im one of the other ENVIRONMENT forum k00ks, Im working on getting his ass banned. We make them look stupid enough and then this bonehead comes with the pronounced anger and misery and spends the whole night posting up volumes of erratic obscenities. Not that I'd ever want him banned though..................


----------



## Big Fitz (Jul 10, 2012)

skookerasbil said:


> Big Fitz said:
> 
> 
> > skookerasbil said:
> ...


Some days, the dog don't wanna chew the rawhide.


----------



## Rat in the Hat (Jul 11, 2012)

OK, who gave chainsaws to the god damn polar bears??


----------



## Rat in the Hat (Jul 11, 2012)

Aww, damn it. The grizzlies got them too.


----------



## bobgnote (Jul 11, 2012)

skookerasbil said:


> Big Fitz said:
> 
> 
> > skookerasbil said:
> ...



_And then, get this, the solar irradiance will go up.  THEN the Earth will be a hot fucker.  But the CO2 isn't getting processed, by all the trees, which got chainsawed.

And the trees still up are affected, by beetles.  So they will burn, like matches in batches.  Don't suck ass, without sucking balls, *sucksassandballs*.  Your boy *Piggie Shitz* will crap right in your happy hole, but I guess you both like that._


----------



## Rat in the Hat (Jul 11, 2012)

Who is giving chainsaws to all the animals, and why???


----------



## Rat in the Hat (Jul 11, 2012)




----------



## Rat in the Hat (Jul 11, 2012)




----------



## Big Fitz (Jul 11, 2012)

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SMhwddNQSWQ"]"Weird Al" Yankovic - Dare To Be Stupid - YouTube[/ame]

put down that chainsaw and listen to me.


----------



## bobgnote (Jul 11, 2012)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Just tell her Bob.
> 
> She already knows.



_If I need advice from a cocksucker, all I have to do is post at USMB environment threads.

How's your asshole, *Turdster*?  Having a good time, on your thumb?

The solar flares are back, so temperatures will go UP, again and again:_

Sun storms: solar activity at fiery high - CBS News


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 11, 2012)

She knows Bob.
You'll feel less guilty.


----------



## bobgnote (Jul 11, 2012)

_And THEN, the solar flares started up, AGAIN.  We will see more record high temps, year after year:_


Sun storms: solar activity at fiery high - CBS News


----------



## TakeAStepBack (Jul 11, 2012)

bobgnote said:


> TakeAStepBack said:
> 
> 
> > I think the AGW peddlers should kill themselves and save the planet.
> ...



No thanks.

But nice to meet you Turdster. By the way, Bob, why are you still here? I thought you were gonna kill yourself and save the planet?


----------



## Rat in the Hat (Jul 11, 2012)

Maybe the solar flares will deactivate all of those evil chainsaws??


----------



## daveman (Jul 11, 2012)

Rat in the Hat said:


> Maybe the solar flares will deactivate all of those evil chainsaws??



Obviously, we need to detonate an electromagnetic pulse weapon over the rainforests so the ignition systems of the evil chainsaws are destroyed.


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 12, 2012)

rat in the hat said:


>





*classic!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!*


----------



## Big Fitz (Jul 12, 2012)

I guess nobody's a Weird Al fan listened to the first lyric.


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Jul 12, 2012)

Global warming is causing the Sun to become more active


----------



## bobgnote (Jul 12, 2012)

_*Crosstard*, why don't you get Ratso to go find some more pictures for us to look at?

*Crosstard*, if Ratso won't get some more pictures, why don't you get sucksassandballs to load the nitz?

Nothing to do, today, but get *Crosstard* spinning . . ._


----------



## bobgnote (Jul 13, 2012)

TakeAStepBack said:


> No thanks.
> 
> But nice to meet you Turdster. By the way, Bob, why are you still here? I thought you were gonna kill yourself and save the planet?



_I thought you were gonna suck dicks, but you suck ass, on the way, *TakeAShitinyerHat*._


----------



## Old Rocks (Jul 13, 2012)

whitehall said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> > Ah Chris, it is all doctored data, you know. After all, the folks back east are just participating in mass hysteria when they think it is hotter than normal, when they believe that a thunderstorm has done as much damage as a hurricane. And those alarmists out West. Bitchin' about a few small bonfires. People are just so gullable.
> ...



Ah Whitey. Ever the dumb fuck. The present satellites by many nations are recording the increasing heat worldwide. Even without the satellite record, the ice in the glaciers and continental icecaps is sending a message loud and clear to any that will listen.


----------



## flacaltenn (Jul 13, 2012)

Ole Rocks says. ".... the ice in the glaciers and continental icecaps is sending a message loud and clear to any that will listen. 
Indeed they are. Hit the lights and strike up the band.. 


The HILLS are alive -- with the sounds of Glaciers. 
The ice they have stored -- for a thousand years. 
.
.
.
.

I go to the hills
for the sounds of melting
I know I will hear
What I've heard before
Some glaciers will live,
With the sound of melting
And I'll have water more.

Thank-you Thank-you -- ... be here all week.. Thank-you..


----------



## PredFan (Jul 14, 2012)

It's the sun stupid.


----------



## Old Rocks (Jul 14, 2012)

flacaltenn said:


> Ole Rocks says. ".... the ice in the glaciers and continental icecaps is sending a message loud and clear to any that will listen.
> Indeed they are. Hit the lights and strike up the band..
> 
> 
> ...



OK. You are capable of abysmal stupidity. We already knew that. You have demonstrated that repeatedly.


----------



## Old Rocks (Jul 14, 2012)

PredFan said:


> It's the sun stupid.



Links?


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 14, 2012)

Old Rocks said:


> PredFan said:
> 
> 
> > It's the sun stupid.
> ...





C'mon Ray.......what a ruse. Asking for sun links as they pertain to climate change is like asking a hairbrusher to prove their trade is conducted with a hair brush. Solar flares are at an all time high. Effect on our planet? Who knows? Just like, who knows the effect of CO2. Nobody knows. Reasoned judgment means ther are many,many variables that effect our climate. PredFan cant prove it. You cant prove it. Nobody can prove it. Whats interesting is..........guys like PredFan, Flacaltenn, DAve, wire, West, Frank...........we dont have an agenda like the true belivers do. And people know that ( obviously). Asking for links has become such a gay internet stunt used only by people who are getting pwned in a debate. And everybody knows that too!!!


Anyway.........people also know that providing links for the true belivers during a climate debate is a waste of time because no matter the information presented, it is dismissed out of hand = fact.


----------



## bobgnote (Jul 14, 2012)

skookerasbil said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> > PredFan said:
> ...



_Let's backtrack through your latest stupid rant, *sucksassandballs*.

"Providing links" is how we establish some kind of likelihood, to factual accuracy, starting with establishment of some consensus, via documentation.  Of course, since you are an admitted "psychotic idiot," you don't believe in scholarship, and the pathway to discovery of consensus FACTS is for you, to obscure.

When you post links, it might be like your last attempt, where in five links, to polls, on what people think of global warming and climate change, you posted three links, to the exact same study, of what people think, in a world, distorted by stupidity, like yours.

Who knows the effects, of CO2?  All kinds of people know what atmospheric and aqueous CO2 can do.  You don't have any problem, with denial, since you are a PSYCHOTIC IDIOT, who won't admit to the greenhouse effect or oceanic acidification, since the PSYCHOTIC IDIOT TEAM obviously disapproves, of noticing CO2 facts.

Solar flares are NOT at an "all time high," Mr.Psycho!  We are at a step-up, during solar cycle 24, which is expected to issue 90 sunspots, which is the least activity, since the cycle which peaked, in 1928, which issued 68 sunspots.  

Here's the Sun, stupids!  It's been cool.  Our climate is heating up, anyway:_

SOLARHAM.com / Solar Cycle 24 / Spaceweather / Amateur Radio VHF Aurora Website













---------------------

Solar Cycle 24 and 2012 - The Complete Idiots Guide to 2012

---------------------

No Maunder mininum (sorry, disinformers) so we're still on track for the hottest decade on record | ThinkProgress

---------------------

New Solar Cycle Prediction - NASA Science







---------------------

Solar cycle 24 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia







----------------------

_Now LOOK, you idiotic psycho!  Get your stupid friends, to LOOK!  The solar activity has been subdued, but the CO2 and global temperature have been going UP:_








_Why do you suppose some idiotic psycho likes to post 3000 shitty posts, per year, at USMB?  What takes idiocy and psychosis, to WIN?  Some kind of game takes THAT, to win.  Let's hear your explanation, for YOUR GAME, sucksassandballs.  

Do you WIN, at sucking, or idiocy, or psychosis?  Did it seem, like I was competing, at any of that?  Noooooo . . ._


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 14, 2012)

bobgnote said:


> skookerasbil said:
> 
> 
> > Old Rocks said:
> ...





indeed s0n..........then why is your side losing?  Since your shit is so "factual" and all.

And talking "links"............been waiting months since my request for a *SINGLE* link displaying where your side is winning!!!! Where? Please show all of us!!!


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 14, 2012)

The level of lose...........is stupifying!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



*Alarmists failing in spectacular fashion*


Global Warming Alarmism Continues To Backfire - Forbes

An example why global warming alarmists are losing ground - Denver Weather | Examiner.com

The NO CARBON TAX Climate Sceptics Blog: It's Good News Week! Alarmists losing...

Warming Alarmists, Knowing They're Losing the Debate, Switch to Blathering about "Extreme Weather Events" - Page 4

Are Climate Alarmists Losing the BBC? - By Greg Pollowitz - Planet Gore - National Review Online

Global warming? I won't be losing any sleep over it - Houston Chronicle

Archived Blog: Are Climate Alarmists losing the Mainstream Media?

The Great Global-warming Crackup


Tom Nelson: Washington Post/Stanford climate poll: Only 28% of Americans trust the things that scientists say about global warming "completely" or "a lot"


Is It Over for Global Warming Alarmism? | Power Line


Climate change alarmists ignore scientific methods - Houston Chronicle

Global warming alarmists in full retreat as skeptics attack greenhouse theory - Orlando Seminole County Environmental News | Examiner.com


Climate scientists are losing the public debate on global warming



Cult of Global Warming Is Losing Influence by Michael Barone on Creators.com - A Syndicate Of Talent


Amy Ridenour's National Center Blog: When the Debate is Balanced, Skeptics Win, Alarmists Lose


C3: The Great WSJ Climate Debate: Alarmist Scientists Reveal The Incredible Lameness of Their Global Warming ScienceRenewable Energy: Not Cheap, Not "Green"


http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article34645.html




*On The Death of Cap and Trade*


http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/26/science/earth/26climate.html?_r=1


The Death of Cap-and-Trade - The Top 10 Everything of 2010 - TIME


The death of cap and trade for the US - Cogeneration & On-Site Power Production

http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/captrade-is-dead-long-live-captrade






Because...........winning................
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kedOQhty8gc"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kedOQhty8gc[/ame]




Ask me?


Am I spiking the football?????????????????


----------



## flacaltenn (Jul 14, 2012)

skookerasbil said:


> indeed s0n..........then why is your side losing?  Since your shit is so "factual" and all.
> 
> And talking "links"............been waiting months since my request for a *SINGLE* link displaying where your side is winning!!!! Where? Please show all of us!!!



It's because the jerk doesn't know the diff between sun spots and a steady TSI increase of about 1.1watts/m2 since the 1700s.. Sunspots are so transient -- they shouldn't be part of the climate discussion UNLESS their peak to peak variation starts to go whacky. 

But it's what the warmers do when anyone mentions TSI increases. Deflect and drag out the solar irradiance due to sunspots WHICH PURPOSELY REMOVES the long term TSI trend.. 

Sunspot irradiance is the short term variation with the long term variation removed. Erego -- Fraudulent response. On purpose -- with malice.

Can't think of anything more immoral or scientifically dishonest.. But there ya go...


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 14, 2012)

Flacaltenn bro.......we just have to show up here to win.


----------



## bobgnote (Jul 14, 2012)

Global Warming Alarmism Continues To Backfire - Forbes



> A new Gallup poll is delivering bad news to global warming alarmists, showing Americans are becoming more and more skeptical of hysterical global warming claims.



_This is the same poll you linked to, when you also linked three times, to a Washington Post-Stanford poll.  This writer must be who teaches all you neo-con queers your English as a retard rant.

No links to science, *suck*?_

An example why global warming alarmists are losing ground - Denver Weather | Examiner.com



> One of the most basic *tenants* (sp) of making a compelling argument can be summed up in one simple saying &#8211; &#8220;It&#8217;s not what you say, it&#8217;s how you say it.&#8221; Certainly the content and facts behind an argument are important but if the message isn&#8217;t delivered with tact, it will be lost and dismissed.
> 
> This is one essential fact that is lost on some global warming alarmists like Al Gore and James Hansen as we have pointed out before.



_It's not how you suck ass, or how you suck balls, but rather, how you suck ass and balls, both!

What point is this asshole writer making, that English as a retard language qualifies a ranter, to sell a ramble, to Forbes?

Tell you what, *suck*.  If you can find a science article or something, post the link.  But so far, all you did was jack off all over USMB, and when you post links, you found them at some ball-suck or butt-fuck site, and you pasted the shit out of links, with no text, but with your gag pictures.

If you have something to discuss, really look at the sites, at each of these links because so far, EVERY LINK YOU POSTED was a piece of shit.

Paste up a sample, from any of them, so I don't give you the benefit of the doubt, just so I can find out you suck ass and balls, both, and you are an idiotic psycho-sociopath._


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 14, 2012)

bobgnote said:


> Global Warming Alarmism Continues To Backfire - Forbes
> 
> 
> 
> ...





people get pissed..........only when they are losing!!!!  s0n...........



my links pwn..............



hysterical angry is gay. Happens alot around here...........but not to the non-crusaders. Ever.


----------



## Old Rocks (Jul 15, 2012)

We have at least a 20% loss of the corn crop, over 1000 counties in the US are declared disaster areas because of drought. And you state the 'warmists' are losing? No, we are all losing. This is the third year in a row that there have been major crop losses in one or more of the world's bread baskets because of a changing climate. At some point, the losses will be bad enough that even in the wealthy nations, there will be hunger because of them.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 15, 2012)

Old Rocks said:


> We have at least a 20% loss of the corn crop, over 1000 counties in the US are declared disaster areas because of drought. And you state the 'warmists' are losing? No, we are all losing. This is the third year in a row that there have been major crop losses in one or more of the world's bread baskets because of a changing climate. At some point, the losses will be bad enough that even in the wealthy nations, there will be hunger because of them.



If we all got rid of our cars, it would rain. Obviously.

I'd be willing to build 100 new nuke plants in the US.
Let's start today. For the children! And the corn.


----------



## bobgnote (Jul 15, 2012)

_What if we get rid of shoving retards?

What if we have to get rid of religion?

Record highs will outnumber record lows, by 50-1, by the end of the century.  And any record lows will be accompanied by record precipitation, usually as snow.  There is more heat and water, in the climatic system.  This will mean we have to make cuts.

I say, cut the tardy, for shoving._


----------



## Trakar (Jul 15, 2012)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Old Rocks said:
> 
> 
> > We have at least a 20% loss of the corn crop, over 1000 counties in the US are declared disaster areas because of drought. And you state the 'warmists' are losing? No, we are all losing. This is the third year in a row that there have been major crop losses in one or more of the world's bread baskets because of a changing climate. At some point, the losses will be bad enough that even in the wealthy nations, there will be hunger because of them.
> ...



The need is probably in excess of 500 by the middle of the century, but I'd be willing to support that effort if we can establish a stringent set of design and operational regulations and guidelines. If industry doesn't want to invest and participate, I'd still advocate for their construction and operation under Corps of Engineers/DARPA and DoE control and management.


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 15, 2012)

Still no links from a single k00k............meanwhile, take a gander about 6 or 7 posts above. I have about 4,000 links on one single post displaying epic levels of pwn.


But I suck balls???!!!!!



And what is the response by the most eccentric k00k on this forum??? Hes posting up in another thread about how chainsaws are the cause of climate change in our world!!!!









But Im sucking balls and ass!!!!


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 15, 2012)

bobgnote said:


> _What if we get rid of shoving retards?
> 
> What if we have to get rid of religion?
> 
> ...





So....tell us..........how many times did you stick the cat with the gorgan today s0n??


Tell me this asshat doesnt bend his cat over the couch for a poke!!!


----------



## flacaltenn (Jul 15, 2012)

Trakar said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Old Rocks said:
> ...



I'd be happy if our NRC -- which has I GUESS been sitting on its' ass for years now -- would sponsor a site where we could TEST AND CERTIFY just the top 2 or 3 designs. All in one place. All built in 3 years. Test the HELL out of them. Try to melt them if you want. Then certify them all in 5 years or less.

Once certified, send the clowns back to D.C. and expedite approvals for any new reactor built exactly to those plans.. Don't NEED the FEDs to build them or run them.. Just get the approval done and get out of the way.


----------



## bobgnote (Jul 15, 2012)

skookerasbil said:


> bobgnote said:
> 
> 
> > _What if we get rid of shoving retards?
> ...



_You sure are shifty and shitty, *sucksassandballs*.  I guess you must have taken that business of getting rid of shoving tards really personally._


----------



## Rat in the Hat (Jul 15, 2012)

Glow-Bull warming has made the ground so hot, my cats have taken up levitation.









But, at least, no one has given them chain-saws.


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 15, 2012)

bobgnote said:


> skookerasbil said:
> 
> 
> > bobgnote said:
> ...




nah s0n......actually, Im reasonably sure nobody in this forum ever heard of "shoving tards"..............lol. s0n......do you live in Irrelevantstown USA by chance??


----------



## Big Fitz (Jul 15, 2012)

skookerasbil said:


> bobgnote said:
> 
> 
> > skookerasbil said:
> ...


Y'know... daon saouth dem ghey boys... dey be shovin tards wif each uvver.


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 15, 2012)

Big Fitz said:


> skookerasbil said:
> 
> 
> > bobgnote said:
> ...




Im tellin' ya Ftiz.........dollar to a thousand stale donuts he's home ramming his fucking cat.


----------



## Cowman (Jul 15, 2012)

skookerasbil said:


> Big Fitz said:
> 
> 
> > skookerasbil said:
> ...



You're obsessed with that fantasy. Thought had to have crossed your mind with your willingness to reference it.

Really now. Your instinct for insult was "sticking a dick in his cat". I think that says more about you than him.


----------



## bobgnote (Jul 16, 2012)

_Journal of Climate, from AMETS, 2004:_

An Error Occurred Setting Your User Cookie

------------------------

_Climate change indicators, from NOAA:_

U.S. and Global Temperature | Climate Change | US EPA








Since 1901, temperatures have risen across the lower 48 states at an average rate of 0.13°F per decade (1.3°F per century) (see Figure 1). Average temperatures have risen more quickly since the late 1970s (0.35 to 0.51°F per decade). Seven of the top 10 warmest years on record for the lower 48 states have occurred since 1990, and the last 10 five-year periods have been the 10 warmest five-year periods on record.

Global average surface temperatures have risen at an average rate of 0.13°F per decade since 1901 (see Figure 2), similar to the rate of warming within the lower 48 states. Since the late 1970s, however, the United States has warmed at nearly twice the global rate. Worldwide, 20002009 was the warmest decade on record.

Some parts of the United States have experienced more warming than others (see Figure 3). The North, the West, and Alaska have seen temperatures increase the most, while some parts of the South have experienced little change. However, not all of these regional trends are statistically meaningful.


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 16, 2012)

Cowman said:


> skookerasbil said:
> 
> 
> > Big Fitz said:
> ...




Actually, stole it from Clint Eastwood s0n..........."Heartbreak Ridge".........funny as shit. But lets face it.........these hill rats from Bumfook, like this Bob guy stick damn near anything with a hole FTL.


----------



## bobgnote (Jul 19, 2012)

Climate Change: News

_Shit happens:_

Weather &#8211; This Just In - CNN.com Blogs








> The "mighty Mississippi" has lost some of its might with the season's epic drought taking its toll on river levels, which are falling to near historic lows.
> 
> The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers will spend nearly $7 million dredging in an attempt to keep ports operational and keep the river open for barge traffic in the coming weeks. River levels in Memphis have dropped to within three feet of their historic lows from the 1988 drought.
> 
> ...








left, Mississippi, April 2011;  right, July 2012



> The U.S. is facing the largest drought since the 1950s, the National Climatic Data Center reported Monday, saying that about 55% of the country was in at least moderate short-term drought in June for the first time since December 1956, when 58% of the country was in a moderate to extreme drought.
> 
> The hot, dry weather in June, which ranked as the third-driest month nationally in at least 118 years, according to the center, made the problem worse.
> 
> That has left farmers on the edge of their seat worrying about how much damage their harvests will sustain and how much of their livelihood they may stand to lose this year.



_Up, up,* UP go the food prices*!_

----------------

_Japan is hot, right now._

Heat wave scorches wide parts of Japan CCTV News - CNTV English



> A strong heat wave has continued to hit eastern and western Japan as the rainy season seemed to be over in these parts.
> The mercury hovered over 39 degrees Celsius on Tuesday afternoon in Gunma Prefecture, which is located north of Tokyo, according to the Japan Meteorological Agency.
> The weather agency issued a heat warning for areas ranging from the northeastern part to the southwestern prefectures. The meteorological agency said on Monday that the mercury read 35 degrees Celsius at about 60 locations in the nation.
> 
> The public broadcaster NHK reported that at least one person died and some 700 others were hospitalized due to heat strokes on Monday. People are being advised to drink enough water to avoid a heat stroke.


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 19, 2012)

bobgnote said:


> Climate Change: News
> 
> _Shit happens:_
> 
> ...






like you said s0n.............shit happens


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 19, 2012)




----------



## Rat in the Hat (Jul 19, 2012)

bobgnote said:


> Climate Change: News
> 
> _Shit happens:_
> 
> ...



Maybe we need more beaver dams on the Mighty Mississippi.

*FETCH THE CHAINSAWS!!!!!*


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 19, 2012)

skookerasbil said:


> bobgnote said:
> 
> 
> > Climate Change: News
> ...



If only we stopped using carbon, the Mississippi would rise.


----------



## Big Fitz (Jul 19, 2012)

Rat in the Hat said:


> bobgnote said:
> 
> 
> > Climate Change: News
> ...


Don't forget, Old man river always dries up as summer drags into fall.  Used to be really bad before the dam/levee system.  That being said, this is really bad.

Also consider for every foot the great lakes drop that's 10,000 tons of cargo less they can haul.


----------



## daveman (Jul 19, 2012)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> skookerasbil said:
> 
> 
> > bobgnote said:
> ...



It's Obama's fault.  If he hadn't stopped the seas from rising, the Gulf of Mexico would back up into the Mississippi and there'd be plenty of water.


----------



## skookerasbil (Jul 19, 2012)

Its all the fault of the chainsaw guys s0ns..............


----------



## Old Rocks (Jul 19, 2012)

Weather swings that are wider and wilder with an overall warming.


----------



## Zander (Jul 19, 2012)




----------



## ginscpy (Jul 20, 2012)

who cares

get a life


----------



## bobgnote (Jul 20, 2012)

_Go for it, *gimpy*.  You don't even have a gag picture, do you?  *Sucksassandballs*, *Pander*, and *DaveDDD* all load pictures, and *FatassRat* loads the best pictures.  

On your way out, take *Pig Shitz* with you, since you retards won't load graphs or studies, either.

Get yourself some damn meds and eat 'em up, if you are simultaneously bored and crazy._


----------

