Creator of Infamous Hockey Stick Graph Refuses to Turn Over Data to Court

[Toddsterpatriot]

Only water vapor can absorb and emit photons.

You aren't fooling anyone, but your fellow fools. Why would ony water be able to absorb and re-emit photons? There isn't anything unique about it in that regard.

Why would ony water be able to absorb and re-emit photons?

You need to ask SSDD.
He feels CO2 isn't a GHG and water vapor is, even though they can both absorb IR.

You are sofa king wrong blaming global warming on water vapor.

"If there had been no increase in the amounts of non-condensable greenhouse gases (CO2), the amount of water vapor in the atmosphere would not have changed with all other variables remaining the same."

More CO2 allows the Atmosphere to hold more water vapor.

It's Water Vapor, Not the CO2 - American Chemical Society

You are sofa king wrong blaming global warming on water vapor.

You're confused.

 

[jon_berzerk]

I've read plenty. I've read the deniers & how they were debunked.

The idea you put your children at risk because you were duped is a sad sad thing.

Years from now, when the effects of global warming heightened, your kids will look back & wonder why their Dad was so very stupid.

Years from now? Don't you know that Manhattan has been under water for nine years already?
The scientists who dispute AGW and any level of severity of AGW have not been debunked. Many are even on the alleged 97% list.
Anyone with an open mind and who wasn't swayed by fitting in with a political group or ideology would respect those differences to the point of yielding to ambivalence at the very least.
You have an agenda.

1970 Years from now?
revised
1980 Years from now?
revised
1990 Years from now?
revised
2000 Years from now?
revised
2010 Years from now?
revised
2017 Years from now?

--LOL

Here uis just how ignorant your post is.

You look at statements msde in 1970 & then run in circles screaming OMG OMG OMG OMG never happened OMG OMG OMG.

Since 1970, steps have been taken to reduce pollution. Pollution from coal fired generation plants,. Vehicle emissdions.

You are sofa king stupid that you think nothing as been done.

HW Bush signed legislation that reduced emissions & stopped acid rain. Where the fuck were you?

The goals later set forth to reduce greenhouse gas emissions call for the reduction to put emissions back to 2005 levels. We are halk way there.

I love it when you assholes post your stupid posts & then follow it with "lol". I am "lol" at how uninformed you are & yet you think you are so smart. That is some funny chit.

Where will we be in 2050 or 2100? A ten year p=old chid today has a 50/50 change of living to 100 or more. Your ignorance is condemning your children & grandchildren to the threat of a more difficult life.

yup none of it has come true loser

it was all phony fake based in lies

Bombshell study: Temperature Adjustments Account For ‘Nearly All Of The Warming’ In Government Climate Data

A new study found adjustments made to global surface temperature readings by scientists in recent years “are totally inconsistent with published and credible U.S. and other temperature data.”

“Thus, it is impossible to conclude from the three published GAST data sets that recent years have been the warmest ever – despite current claims of record setting warming,” according to a study published June 27 by two scientists and a veteran statistician.

The peer-reviewed study tried to validate current surface temperature datasets managed by NASA, NOAA and the UK’s Met Office, all of which make adjustments to raw thermometer readings. Skeptics of man-made global warming have criticized the adjustments.

Climate scientists often apply adjustments to surface temperature thermometers to account for “biases” in the data. The new study doesn’t question the adjustments themselves but notes nearly all of them increase the warming trend.

Basically, “cyclical pattern in the earlier reported data has very nearly been ‘adjusted’ out” of temperature readings taken from weather stations, buoys, ships and other sources.

In fact, almost all the surface temperature warming adjustments cool past temperatures and warm more current records, increasing the warming trend, according to the study’s authors.

Bombshell study: Temperature Adjustments Account For ‘Nearly All Of The Warming’ In Government Climate Data

BTW, your story has been debunked.

Just like I debunked your stupid post.

t one point, scientists predicted the death of many of our lakes due to acid rain. OMG OMG OMG It didn't happen OMG OMG OMG. Because we did something to stop it. It does not mean the predictions were not true at the time they were made.,

Pull your head of ioyt your ass. Become informed,. Help your children. Why do you hate your children?

only in your retarded mind has anything been "debunked"

face it man made global warming has been debunked

it has all been a fraud

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I've read plenty. I've read the deniers & how they were debunked.

The idea you put your children at risk because you were duped is a sad sad thing.

Years from now, when the effects of global warming heightened, your kids will look back & wonder why their Dad was so very stupid.

Years from now? Don't you know that Manhattan has been under water for nine years already?
The scientists who dispute AGW and any level of severity of AGW have not been debunked. Many are even on the alleged 97% list.
Anyone with an open mind and who wasn't swayed by fitting in with a political group or ideology would respect those differences to the point of yielding to ambivalence at the very least.
You have an agenda.

The vast majority believe in MMGW. There is discussion on how severe the effects will be.

MMGW is based on science. Republicans used to believe in science, Now science is"fake News" & you assholes listen to fossil fuel funded skeptics.

The time to do something is now. Effects are happening now. If we wait until the effects get to the point that even you dickheads recognize we have to do smething, it would take decades to lower the greenhouse gass amounts in the atmosphere. But hey, you'll be dead & fuck your kids, right?

Science is not hiding your data from peer review.

Science is not taking some one else's data & twisting it so you can make money from the fossil fuel industry & Republican leadership in order to dupe dumbasses like you.

Science is not taking some one else's data & twisting it so you can make money from the fossil fuel industry

Exactly!
Science is taking some one else's data & twisting it so you can make money from government grants.

 

[Billy_Bob]

Anybody who would rely on a mere 1000-2000 years of data to declare major planet climate shift is a fool.

I don't care if any temperature rise can be proven. What happens if CO2 and other GHGs keep rising? The trapped energy has to do something. Logic should tell you that temps will rise.

The CO2 is consumed by trees that In turn produce Oxygen that we breathe and we in turn expel CO2 that the trees consume...... and on and on and on

Thanks for the biology lesson, but if trees are consuming all the excess CO2, why has the amount in the atmosphere been going up, since the advent of the Industrial Revolution?

Warming increases bio mass and thus CO2.. its not all man made you moron..

 

[Billy_Bob]

Years from now? Don't you know that Manhattan has been under water for nine years already?
The scientists who dispute AGW and any level of severity of AGW have not been debunked. Many are even on the alleged 97% list.
Anyone with an open mind and who wasn't swayed by fitting in with a political group or ideology would respect those differences to the point of yielding to ambivalence at the very least.
You have an agenda.

The vast majority believe in MMGW. There is discussion on how severe the effects will be.

MMGW is based on science. Republicans used to believe in science, Now science is"fake News" & you assholes listen to fossil fuel funded skeptics.

The time to do something is now. Effects are happening now. If we wait until the effects get to the point that even you dickheads recognize we have to do smething, it would take decades to lower the greenhouse gass amounts in the atmosphere. But hey, you'll be dead & fuck your kids, right?

Science is not hiding your data from peer review.

Science is not taking some one else's data & twisting it so you can make money from the fossil fuel industry & Republican leadership in order to dupe dumbasses like you.

Don't you people ever get tired of trotting out the same tired old memes?

Sent from my iPhone 25S GT Turbo

Don't you people ever get tired of posting the same old debunked denier crap?

You have debunked nothing.. Some of us have shown you Quantitative, Observed, Empirical Evidence which debunks your alarmist crap..

 

[Billy_Bob]

Only water vapor can absorb and emit photons.

You aren't fooling anyone, but your fellow fools. Why would ony water be able to absorb and re-emit photons? There isn't anything unique about it in that regard.

Why would ony water be able to absorb and re-emit photons?

You need to ask SSDD.
He feels CO2 isn't a GHG and water vapor is, even though they can both absorb IR.

That's you source?!?!

SSDD is the source of my amusement, the target of my mockery.

Funny for someone who is wrong on many things. Like CO2 does not warm itself, it requires other molecules which can warm itself to warm. CO2 almost instantaneously re-emits energy absorbed at the same wave length while water vapor absorbs, warms and re-emits at a slight longer wave length than it receives because of energy consumption in warming of the molecule. (excitement phase, residency time in holding energy is much longer in water vapor)

SSDD is right on this.

 

[westwall]

I've read plenty. I've read the deniers & how they were debunked.

The idea you put your children at risk because you were duped is a sad sad thing.

Years from now, when the effects of global warming heightened, your kids will look back & wonder why their Dad was so very stupid.

Years from now? Don't you know that Manhattan has been under water for nine years already?
The scientists who dispute AGW and any level of severity of AGW have not been debunked. Many are even on the alleged 97% list.
Anyone with an open mind and who wasn't swayed by fitting in with a political group or ideology would respect those differences to the point of yielding to ambivalence at the very least.
You have an agenda.

The vast majority believe in MMGW. There is discussion on how severe the effects will be.

MMGW is based on science. Republicans used to believe in science, Now science is"fake News" & you assholes listen to fossil fuel funded skeptics.

The time to do something is now. Effects are happening now. If we wait until the effects get to the point that even you dickheads recognize we have to do smething, it would take decades to lower the greenhouse gass amounts in the atmosphere. But hey, you'll be dead & fuck your kids, right?

Science is not hiding your data from peer review.

Science is not taking some one else's data & twisting it so you can make money from the fossil fuel industry & Republican leadership in order to dupe dumbasses like you.

I agree. But that's EXACTLY what climatologists do. Only they make their money from the worlds taxpayers.

 

[westwall]

Years from now? Don't you know that Manhattan has been under water for nine years already?
The scientists who dispute AGW and any level of severity of AGW have not been debunked. Many are even on the alleged 97% list.
Anyone with an open mind and who wasn't swayed by fitting in with a political group or ideology would respect those differences to the point of yielding to ambivalence at the very least.
You have an agenda.

The vast majority believe in MMGW. There is discussion on how severe the effects will be.

MMGW is based on science. Republicans used to believe in science, Now science is"fake News" & you assholes listen to fossil fuel funded skeptics.

The time to do something is now. Effects are happening now. If we wait until the effects get to the point that even you dickheads recognize we have to do smething, it would take decades to lower the greenhouse gass amounts in the atmosphere. But hey, you'll be dead & fuck your kids, right?

Science is not hiding your data from peer review.

Science is not taking some one else's data & twisting it so you can make money from the fossil fuel industry & Republican leadership in order to dupe dumbasses like you.

Can you ever think for yourself, or are you just a fulltime parrot repeating bullshit you hear?

I've read the reports & studies & I have read the denier crap. I decided to go with science. You can stick with the limbaughs, infowars, Glenn Beck, and Fox News.

Wow, you've read a whole bunch of computer derived fiction and think it's real. Pretty sad. Show us a single study you have read that relies entirely on empirical data.

GO!

 

[konradv]

Can you ever think for yourself, or are you just a fulltime parrot repeating bullshit you hear?

Afraid someone is trying to steal YOUR shtick?

 

[Weatherman2020]

The vast majority believe in MMGW. There is discussion on how severe the effects will be.

MMGW is based on science. Republicans used to believe in science, Now science is"fake News" & you assholes listen to fossil fuel funded skeptics.

The time to do something is now. Effects are happening now. If we wait until the effects get to the point that even you dickheads recognize we have to do smething, it would take decades to lower the greenhouse gass amounts in the atmosphere. But hey, you'll be dead & fuck your kids, right?

Science is not hiding your data from peer review.

Science is not taking some one else's data & twisting it so you can make money from the fossil fuel industry & Republican leadership in order to dupe dumbasses like you.

Can you ever think for yourself, or are you just a fulltime parrot repeating bullshit you hear?

I've read the reports & studies & I have read the denier crap. I decided to go with science. You can stick with the limbaughs, infowars, Glenn Beck, and Fox News.

Wow, you've read a whole bunch of computer derived fiction and think it's real. Pretty sad. Show us a single study you have read that relies entirely on empirical data.

GO!

How dare you ask for empirical data, science denier!

 

[SSDD]

I've read the reports & studies & I have read the denier crap. I decided to go with science. You can stick with the limbaughs, infowars, Glenn Beck, and Fox News.

Really? You decided to go with science? Science is all about observation, measurement, and quantification of data and using that to support a claim. Can you show me a single piece of observed, measured, quantified data that supports the AGW claim over natural variability? Just a single piece?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Only water vapor can absorb and emit photons.

You aren't fooling anyone, but your fellow fools. Why would ony water be able to absorb and re-emit photons? There isn't anything unique about it in that regard.

Why would ony water be able to absorb and re-emit photons?

You need to ask SSDD.
He feels CO2 isn't a GHG and water vapor is, even though they can both absorb IR.

That's you source?!?!

SSDD is the source of my amusement, the target of my mockery.

Funny for someone who is wrong on many things. Like CO2 does not warm itself, it requires other molecules which can warm itself to warm. CO2 almost instantaneously re-emits energy absorbed at the same wave length while water vapor absorbs, warms and re-emits at a slight longer wave length than it receives because of energy consumption in warming of the molecule. (excitement phase, residency time in holding energy is much longer in water vapor)

SSDD is right on this.

Like CO2 does not warm itself, it requires other molecules which can warm itself to warm.

Huh?

water vapor absorbs, warms and re-emits at a slight longer wave length

Link?

 

[SSDD]

water vapor absorbs, warms and re-emits at a slight longer wave length

Link?

You need a link to something so obvious?...if you had a clue that is. If the water vapor is warmed by the IR that it absorbs, that takes energy...ergo...it would emit at a slightly lower wavelength since the energy would be at a lower frequency. You never fail to demonstrate exactly how little you know...and the idea that someone like you could mock anyone...even konrad is laughable.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

water vapor absorbs, warms and re-emits at a slight longer wave length

Link?

You need a link to something so obvious?...if you had a clue that is. If the water vapor is warmed by the IR that it absorbs, that takes energy...ergo...it would emit at a slightly lower wavelength since the energy would be at a lower frequency. You never fail to demonstrate exactly how little you know...and the idea that someone like you could mock anyone...even konrad is laughable.

You need a link to something so obvious?...

You have a link that shows

"water vapor absorbs, warms and re-emits at a slight longer wave length"?

Great. Post it.

If the water vapor is warmed by the IR that it absorbs, that takes energy..

Yup. The absorbed photon warms the water vapor.

...ergo...it would emit at a slightly lower wavelength since the energy would be at a lower frequency.

Show me.

 

[Billy_Bob]

You aren't fooling anyone, but your fellow fools. Why would ony water be able to absorb and re-emit photons? There isn't anything unique about it in that regard.

Why would ony water be able to absorb and re-emit photons?

You need to ask SSDD.
He feels CO2 isn't a GHG and water vapor is, even though they can both absorb IR.

That's you source?!?!

SSDD is the source of my amusement, the target of my mockery.

Funny for someone who is wrong on many things. Like CO2 does not warm itself, it requires other molecules which can warm itself to warm. CO2 almost instantaneously re-emits energy absorbed at the same wave length while water vapor absorbs, warms and re-emits at a slight longer wave length than it receives because of energy consumption in warming of the molecule. (excitement phase, residency time in holding energy is much longer in water vapor)

SSDD is right on this.

Like CO2 does not warm itself, it requires other molecules which can warm itself to warm.

Huh?

water vapor absorbs, warms and re-emits at a slight longer wave length

Link?

Its basic molecular physics. A molecule will only vibrate when its energy balance is positive and energy is looking for a way to exit. CO2 can only vibrate for a 0.009 nanoseconds because its electrical bond does not allow excess energy to be retained. This means that the molecule is virtually incapable of internal warming. Water vapor will vibrate from 590 nanoseconds to over 3 seconds allowing the heating of the molecule and the residual energy is re-emitted at a slightly lower frequency due to the consumption of energy.

All one needs to do is look at the broad spectrum of water vapor emissions and ask yourself why it is..

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Why would ony water be able to absorb and re-emit photons?

You need to ask SSDD.
He feels CO2 isn't a GHG and water vapor is, even though they can both absorb IR.

That's you source?!?!

SSDD is the source of my amusement, the target of my mockery.

Funny for someone who is wrong on many things. Like CO2 does not warm itself, it requires other molecules which can warm itself to warm. CO2 almost instantaneously re-emits energy absorbed at the same wave length while water vapor absorbs, warms and re-emits at a slight longer wave length than it receives because of energy consumption in warming of the molecule. (excitement phase, residency time in holding energy is much longer in water vapor)

SSDD is right on this.

Like CO2 does not warm itself, it requires other molecules which can warm itself to warm.

Huh?

water vapor absorbs, warms and re-emits at a slight longer wave length

Link?

Its basic molecular physics. A molecule will only vibrate when its energy balance is positive and energy is looking for a way to exit. CO2 can only vibrate for a 0.009 nanoseconds because its electrical bond does not allow excess energy to be retained. This means that the molecule is virtually incapable of internal warming. Water vapor will vibrate from 590 nanoseconds to over 3 seconds allowing the heating of the molecule and the residual energy is re-emitted at a slightly lower frequency due to the consumption of energy.

All one needs to do is look at the broad spectrum of water vapor emissions and ask yourself why it is..

That's awesome!

Still waiting for your proof.

water vapor absorbs, warms and re-emits at a slight longer wave length

Show me.

 

[Billy_Bob]

That's you source?!?!

SSDD is the source of my amusement, the target of my mockery.

Funny for someone who is wrong on many things. Like CO2 does not warm itself, it requires other molecules which can warm itself to warm. CO2 almost instantaneously re-emits energy absorbed at the same wave length while water vapor absorbs, warms and re-emits at a slight longer wave length than it receives because of energy consumption in warming of the molecule. (excitement phase, residency time in holding energy is much longer in water vapor)

SSDD is right on this.

Like CO2 does not warm itself, it requires other molecules which can warm itself to warm.

Huh?

water vapor absorbs, warms and re-emits at a slight longer wave length

Link?

Its basic molecular physics. A molecule will only vibrate when its energy balance is positive and energy is looking for a way to exit. CO2 can only vibrate for a 0.009 nanoseconds because its electrical bond does not allow excess energy to be retained. This means that the molecule is virtually incapable of internal warming. Water vapor will vibrate from 590 nanoseconds to over 3 seconds allowing the heating of the molecule and the residual energy is re-emitted at a slightly lower frequency due to the consumption of energy.

All one needs to do is look at the broad spectrum of water vapor emissions and ask yourself why it is..

That's awesome!

Still waiting for your proof.

water vapor absorbs, warms and re-emits at a slight longer wave length

Show me.

Narrow banding is the hallmark of the inability to hold energy. Water vapor however, has a very large bandwidth and has an incredible ability to hold energy.

 

[SSDD]

Its basic molecular physics. A molecule will only vibrate when its energy balance is positive and energy is looking for a way to exit. CO2 can only vibrate for a 0.009 nanoseconds because its electrical bond does not allow excess energy to be retained. This means that the molecule is virtually incapable of internal warming. Water vapor will vibrate from 590 nanoseconds to over 3 seconds allowing the heating of the molecule and the residual energy is re-emitted at a slightly lower frequency due to the consumption of energy.

All one needs to do is look at the broad spectrum of water vapor emissions and ask yourself why it is..

Pointless to talk to him...it is like talking to a 5 year old...one liners and "why" questions are about all he can manage. I keep him on ignore mostly and talk to him every once in a while to see if he has grown up any. So far...he is still talking on the level of a 5 year old....why mommy...why?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

SSDD is the source of my amusement, the target of my mockery.

Funny for someone who is wrong on many things. Like CO2 does not warm itself, it requires other molecules which can warm itself to warm. CO2 almost instantaneously re-emits energy absorbed at the same wave length while water vapor absorbs, warms and re-emits at a slight longer wave length than it receives because of energy consumption in warming of the molecule. (excitement phase, residency time in holding energy is much longer in water vapor)

SSDD is right on this.

Like CO2 does not warm itself, it requires other molecules which can warm itself to warm.

Huh?

water vapor absorbs, warms and re-emits at a slight longer wave length

Link?

Its basic molecular physics. A molecule will only vibrate when its energy balance is positive and energy is looking for a way to exit. CO2 can only vibrate for a 0.009 nanoseconds because its electrical bond does not allow excess energy to be retained. This means that the molecule is virtually incapable of internal warming. Water vapor will vibrate from 590 nanoseconds to over 3 seconds allowing the heating of the molecule and the residual energy is re-emitted at a slightly lower frequency due to the consumption of energy.

All one needs to do is look at the broad spectrum of water vapor emissions and ask yourself why it is..

That's awesome!

Still waiting for your proof.

water vapor absorbs, warms and re-emits at a slight longer wave length

Show me.

View attachment 137703
Narrow banding is the hallmark of the inability to hold energy. Water vapor however, has a very large bandwidth and has an incredible ability to hold energy.

Thanks for the chart.
Do you have one that backs up your claim?

water vapor absorbs, warms and re-emits at a slight longer wave length

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Its basic molecular physics. A molecule will only vibrate when its energy balance is positive and energy is looking for a way to exit. CO2 can only vibrate for a 0.009 nanoseconds because its electrical bond does not allow excess energy to be retained. This means that the molecule is virtually incapable of internal warming. Water vapor will vibrate from 590 nanoseconds to over 3 seconds allowing the heating of the molecule and the residual energy is re-emitted at a slightly lower frequency due to the consumption of energy.

All one needs to do is look at the broad spectrum of water vapor emissions and ask yourself why it is..

Pointless to talk to him...it is like talking to a 5 year old...one liners and "why" questions are about all he can manage. I keep him on ignore mostly and talk to him every once in a while to see if he has grown up any. So far...he is still talking on the level of a 5 year old....why mommy...why?

Smart photons. DERP!