Breaking: Scientists say Ice Age imminent!!!

[jc456]

Deniers have been predicting an Ice Age since the 1970s, but the most that ever happens is the warming stalls for a period of time and then the warming begins again exactly where the last warming cycle left off. We don't even get a cooling cycle back to the last cool point let alone an Ice Age, only a stall in the warming and then some more warming.

so you are conceding that there are natural warming and cooling cycles? What about hottest year eva stuff?

There hasn't been a cooling cycle in over 100 years. Why are there no more cooling cycles?

Funny stuff, some people will believe anything a priest in the religion says. But look at the 40s to the 70s, 1998 to today, I mean dude really you got to check out other web and news sites. your data is greatly in error.

The 40s to the 70s were FLAT as well as 1998 to today. In neither of those flat cycles did it cool to a low of 1901 to 1910, and the current flat cycle has not cooled to the lows of the 40s to the 70s. The fact remains there has been no significant cooling in over 100 years.

just some more funny material on cooling that is missed by our friends on the left.

 

[flacaltenn]

Because the warming has ALREADY stalled

Not really.

Global Analysis - Annual 2014 | National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI)

• The year 2014 was the warmest year across global land and ocean surfaces since records began in 1880. The annually-averaged temperature was 0.69°C (1.24°F) above the 20th century average of 13.9°C (57.0°F), easily breaking the previous records of 2005 and 2010 by 0.04°C (0.07°F). This also marks the 38th consecutive year (since 1977) that the yearly global temperature was above average. Including 2014, 9 of the 10 warmest years in the 135-year period of record have occurred in the 21st century. 1998 currently ranks as the fourth warmest year on record.

Don't be a denier. .Even the IPCC addresses "the hiatus" in AR5 report. Yearly records don't matter when you are sitting at relative maximum. How many times the Dow break 18000 while sitting in the 17,9XXs ??

What matters is that the actual trend line has gone down to near zero and those records (the ones that were REALLY records and not withdrawn by NOAA after the fact) were records by 0.03degC. In the noise level..

And I'm not doing this AGAIN with you. Will just call you "a denier" and quote the IPCC report.

Of course you don't want to discuss it because the "hiatus" has been debunked, and deniers only have erroneous data to "support" them.

Scientists Cast Doubt On An Apparent 'Hiatus' In Global Warming

The new results, published in the journal Science, may dispel the idea that Earth has been in the midst of a "global warming hiatus" — a period over the past 20 years where the planet's temperature appears to have risen very little.

"We think the data no longer supports the notion of having a hiatus," says Tom Karl, a scientist with the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration and coauthor of the new study.

Now Karl's team, which is directly responsible for taking the Earth's temperature, says a technological shift in the way the measurements are taken has also obscured the temperature's climb.

Here's why: The single number — average global temperature — comes from tens of thousands of independent temperature readings. And, in recent decades, the technology for getting those readings has gradually shifted.

On land those measurements are made by weather stations; on the sea, the job has generally been done by commercial and military ships for decades. But starting in the 1980s, governments also began dropping buoys into the ocean to do independent measurements.

Karl and his colleagues decided to look at stretches of water where ships pass very near buoys, to compare the two temperatures. And they made a surprising discovery.

"The buoys actually read colder than the ships," Karl says.

Even though the two thermometers were in the same place, they gave different readings. And it was happening all over the world. As more buoys were dropped into the sea — all delivering measurements that were consistently cooler than a ship would show in that same spot — the warming trend in the average global temperature seemed to slow dramatically.

But Karl and his colleagues believe what looked like a flattening of the warming trend actually just reflected a change in the way the temperature was taken. When the team factored in a correction to the historical data that reconciled the buoys with the ships, they found that what had seemed to be a hiatus in warming disappeared.

Yeah Yeah.. ONE PAPER.. And not a complete one.. And produced only for the period of 2000 thru 2014.

That's not a refutation -- that's a hail mary.. You keep pounding that if it gets you off..

BULLSHIT!
The buoys data goes back to the 1980s. You obviously believe the study or you wouldn't misrepresent it.
Thank you.

The CORRECTIONS out of the Karl Paper only cover the hiatus period I mentioned. The period that needs "covering up:".. Why do suppose that is? It's as convienient for NOAA/NASA as the fact that all their continuous re-editing of OLD temperature data always results in depressing the 30s and 40s and accelerating the 80s and 90s. The only conclusion from that would be that the 60s and 70s data was SO PERFECT and SO ACCURATE that it never needed any "correction".. Pretty improbable eh?

 

[flacaltenn]

There hasn't been a cooling cycle in over 100 years. Why are there no more cooling cycles?

A 100 years? That's about the adjustment time for the MASSIVE earth to seek a new thermal equilibrium. It's a speck on an appropriate climate time scale. Wouldn't even SEE a 100 year event on ANY of the "hockey stick" preparations of ancient temperature data..

 

[edthecynic]

The CORRECTIONS out of the Karl Paper only cover the hiatus period I mentioned. The period that needs "covering up:".

More BULLSHIT!
The corrections based on the more accurate buoy data were applied to the entire historical data. Deniers depend entirely on flawed data and they hate anything that makes the data more accurate.

 

[edthecynic]

There hasn't been a cooling cycle in over 100 years. Why are there no more cooling cycles?

A 100 years? That's about the adjustment time for the MASSIVE earth to seek a new thermal equilibrium. It's a speck on an appropriate climate time scale. Wouldn't even SEE a 100 year event on ANY of the "hockey stick" preparations of ancient temperature data..

And yet deniers like Cruz claim a mere 18 year flat period is so ENORMOUS that it trumps the entire global warming argument.
Go figure.

 

[flacaltenn]

There hasn't been a cooling cycle in over 100 years. Why are there no more cooling cycles?

A 100 years? That's about the adjustment time for the MASSIVE earth to seek a new thermal equilibrium. It's a speck on an appropriate climate time scale. Wouldn't even SEE a 100 year event on ANY of the "hockey stick" preparations of ancient temperature data..

And yet deniers like Cruz claim a mere 18 year flat period is so ENORMOUS that it trumps the entire global warming argument.
Go figure.

That's the retail level of climate change discussion. I have higher standards and expectations myself.

The point Cruz is using is just a counterpoint to your silly question of why we've seen no cooling in the past 100 years.

 

[flacaltenn]

Corrections appear pretty close to ZERO Cynic BEFORE the "pause". You got evidence they go back further???

 

[mamooth]

Tisdale? That's really scraping the bottom of the conspiracy barrel.

You also neglect to mention that the total adjustments still make the warming look smaller. That is, you're cherrypicking, looking at one little adjustment and ignoring the total adjustments, which still make warming look smaller.

If scientists wanted to adjust the data to show more warming, then why have they adjusted the data to show less warming? Deniers have no answer to that, hence the cherrypicking and other evasion tactics.

 

[flacaltenn]

Tisdale? That's really scraping the bottom of the conspiracy barrel.

You also neglect to mention that the total adjustments still make the warming look smaller. That is, you're cherrypicking, looking at one little adjustment and ignoring the total adjustments, which still make warming look smaller.

If scientists wanted to adjust the data to show more warming, then why have they adjusted the data to show less warming? Deniers have no answer to that, hence the cherrypicking and other evasion tactics.

Go show me the "OFFICIAL" version of the corrections then. Lay the HELL off of folks unless YOU KNOW that they are lying or manipulating the data. Like EVERYTHING on skepshitscience...

Absolutely no reason to suspect the graph because it's like all the others.

 

[skookerasbil]

Tisdale? That's really scraping the bottom of the conspiracy barrel.

You also neglect to mention that the total adjustments still make the warming look smaller. That is, you're cherrypicking, looking at one little adjustment and ignoring the total adjustments, which still make warming look smaller.

If scientists wanted to adjust the data to show more warming, then why have they adjusted the data to show less warming? Deniers have no answer to that, hence the cherrypicking and other evasion tactics.

Evasion? Cherry picking?

OK sOn..whatever you say.

Except your shit and every other AGW k00k post in here gets decimated on page 6 of this thread = 4 billion links that display clearly: for cold or warming.........computer models as predictors are a joke.

 

[Old Rocks]

I do believe that I will go with the evidence presented by the scientists over that presented by people like Evens and MacIntyre, that have no credentials in meteorology or physics.

And the ice tells the tale.

But, of course, you win, as the money put out by the energy corporations far outweigh the coverage of the evidence that the scientists present. Just like the Keystone line. The corporations have the far right loons screaming, mewling, and puking over the job loss, yet that pipeline would not even create 1% of the jobs that solar is presently creating in the US.

So, we will find out what a doubling of the CO2 will create in the way of climate change. With a quadrupling of the CH4 levels added in. And then you silly bastards will be blaming the scientists for failing to tell you that this was not a good thing. And screaming for them to hurry up and solve that problems created, while at the same time withdrawing funding for research into those problems. You fellow are such a logical bunch of ninnys.

 

[waltky]

After all dat work...

... Uncle Ferd ain't gonna like it...

... when Granny tells him to take the pontoons off...

... an' put skis onna sides o' the trailer.

 

[skookerasbil]

October 2015.......record snow for the month in Siberia!!!

Record Siberian snow could bode ill for Northeast

The AGW k00ks........who predicted "no more snow" just 15 years ago and who now say snow = warming ( lol....hows that working out for them? ).......are losing............again.

 

[skookerasbil]

I do believe that I will go with the evidence presented by the scientists over that presented by people like Evens and MacIntyre, that have no credentials in meteorology or physics.

And the ice tells the tale.

But, of course, you win, as the money put out by the energy corporations far outweigh the coverage of the evidence that the scientists present. Just like the Keystone line. The corporations have the far right loons screaming, mewling, and puking over the job loss, yet that pipeline would not even create 1% of the jobs that solar is presently creating in the US.

So, we will find out what a doubling of the CO2 will create in the way of climate change. With a quadrupling of the CH4 levels added in. And then you silly bastards will be blaming the scientists for failing to tell you that this was not a good thing. And screaming for them to hurry up and solve that problems created, while at the same time withdrawing funding for research into those problems. You fellow are such a logical bunch of ninnys.

The ice sure as hell does tell the tale...................


Global warming computer models collapse; Arctic ice sheets rapidly expand as planet plunges into global cooling

 

[Likkmee]

Time for the oil-energy and auto companies to lobby lesser emissions and crank those coal plants back up.Can you imagine how much money they'd lose from not having air conditioners running or having to keep beer cold.
Eutopia. Naturally cold beer and a cold bedroom full of hot pussy. .
Makes one long for the old LA skyline.

 

[Old Rocks]

I do believe that I will go with the evidence presented by the scientists over that presented by people like Evens and MacIntyre, that have no credentials in meteorology or physics.

And the ice tells the tale.

But, of course, you win, as the money put out by the energy corporations far outweigh the coverage of the evidence that the scientists present. Just like the Keystone line. The corporations have the far right loons screaming, mewling, and puking over the job loss, yet that pipeline would not even create 1% of the jobs that solar is presently creating in the US.

So, we will find out what a doubling of the CO2 will create in the way of climate change. With a quadrupling of the CH4 levels added in. And then you silly bastards will be blaming the scientists for failing to tell you that this was not a good thing. And screaming for them to hurry up and solve that problems created, while at the same time withdrawing funding for research into those problems. You fellow are such a logical bunch of ninnys.

The ice sure as hell does tell the tale...................


Global warming computer models collapse; Arctic ice sheets rapidly expand as planet plunges into global cooling

My goodness, surely this is major news;

Global warming computer models collapse; Arctic ice sheets rapidly expand as planet plunges into global cooling

Tuesday, September 10, 2013
by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger
Editor of NaturalNews.com (See all articles...)
Tags: global warming, computer models, global cooling

And so, as the planet plunged into global cooling in 2013, we had the warmest year on record in 2014. Then beat that this year. Now that is some global cooling.




Learn more: Global warming computer models collapse; Arctic ice sheets rapidly expand as planet plunges into global cooling

 

[skookerasbil]

The alarmists look ONLY at man-made impacts on the climate...........and how fucking stoopid is that? The climate alarmists need to look at the sun and ocean circulations. The don't.

duh

Dr Judith Curry says we need to look at more influences.........we still don't know enough. Need more research...........more evidence. Plus.......for Christsakes, we don't even know if warming is dangerous!!!

 

[mamooth]

Curry's current flagrant hypocrisy is yet another thing that results in nobody taking her seriously.

When a single congressman requested records from a few denier scientists about who was giving them money (and later admitted that he was out of line), Curry went into spasms of outrage.

But now that a congressional committee wants more or less every communication from every climate scientist out there, Curry has done a full 180 and is enthusiastically supporting that Stalinist tactic.

She's a sad party hack now. Why? Jealousy. She was always a second-rate scientist. There's nothing significant in her bio, which is why nobody paid attention to her before. That apparently rankled her. But by selling out her integrity, she becomes the center of cult adulation, and gets back at all the people who failed to recognize her brilliance.

On the global cooling topic, Curry's 2013 Stadium Waves paper is widely considered to be joke science. It declared there would be no warming until at least the 2030s. 2014 and 2015 show what a big fail that prediction was.

 

[Old Rocks]

Of course, we need more research. But we are already seeing changes in the climate, changes in the cryosphere, and these changes are already causing damage to our infrastructure. As far as Dr. Curry is concerned, she now has a record of failed predictions similiar to that of Dr. Lindzen. That is not conducive to one's scientific reputation.

 

[skookerasbil]

Curry's current flagrant hypocrisy is yet another thing that results in nobody taking her seriously.

When a single congressman requested records from a few denier scientists about who was giving them money (and later admitted that he was out of line), Curry went into spasms of outrage.

But now that a congressional committee wants more or less every communication from every climate scientist out there, Curry has done a full 180 and is enthusiastically supporting that Stalinist tactic.

She's a sad party hack now. Why? Jealousy. She was always a second-rate scientist. There's nothing significant in her bio, which is why nobody paid attention to her before. That apparently rankled her. But by selling out her integrity, she becomes the center of cult adulation, and gets back at all the people who failed to recognize her brilliance.

On the global cooling topic, Curry's 2013 Stadium Waves paper is widely considered to be joke science. It declared there would be no warming until at least the 2030s. 2014 and 2015 show what a big fail that prediction was.

Ever notice?

The mere mention Dr Judith Curry makes those who are members of the alarmist religion go mental!!! Invariably.

Why?

She used to be one of them up until 2009.........saw all the data rigging going on........saw the peer review process morph into a dictatorial system.....saw the handling of the Climate-gate investigation ( a total farce )......saw statements from climate alarmist bigs like THIS. >>>

"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


and thought to herself.........


and "Wait a minute.....why does the fraternity of climate science reject ALL research findings that interject non "man-made" causes" as having an impact on the climate?


For asking THAT, the woman was burned at the stake by ALL of the alarmists!!!


But dont take my word for it............check out the video posted above and decide for yourself if she is genuine or a $3.00 bill.