For the last Time, "skeptics," the SUN is NOT the cause of climate change, and "solar cycle" was put out by the fraud

[EMH]

really? Thank you for making some things understandable outside the clutter of denialist shit throw at the wall.

If Faux says it and your beaked birdbrain parrots it, it must be true...

BAWK....

 

[EMH]

Note words "might have" in link. Correlation is not causation.

Greenland froze while North America thawed.

The SUN did not do that.

Co2 did not do that.

Both are eliminated as suspects...

 

[Dante Reawakened]

Greenland froze while North America thawed.

The SUN did not do that.

Co2 did not do that.

Both are eliminated as suspects...

Again, thank you.

 

[Crick]

Here is one major reason why we have spastic weather in the last 50+ years.

Project Haaarp! Weather Manipulation! Responsible for Extreme Weather, Climate Change

There's a reason HAARP sounds like someone laughing.

 

[Crick]

Greenland froze while North America thawed.

The SUN did not do that.

Co2 did not do that.

Both are eliminated as suspects...

Your argument here is childishly oversimplistic. Warming - from any cause - does not instantly eliminate all the ice on the planet. Ice is melting all over the planet, yet Greenland, Antarctica and a good part of the northern latitudes are still covered in ice.

A consistent mistake you make is to assume that everyone has been paying attention to you and is familiar with your arguments so that you only need speak of them in shorthand. I think almost no one is paying attention to you or your arguments (Todd seem to be an exception) and no one knows or cares what your shorthand proclamations are intended to convey. This would be the result of your constant hostility towards almost everyone. I'd suggest slowing down, stop shouting and give us a clear and detailed explanation of what you think is happening and why. Rejoin the conversation.

 

[EMH]

Your argument here is childishly oversimplistic. Warming - from any cause - does not instantly eliminate all the ice on the planet. Ice is melting all over the planet, yet Greenland, Antarctica and a good part of the northern latitudes are still covered in ice.

A consistent mistake you make is to assume that everyone has been paying attention to you and is familiar with your arguments so that you only need speak of them in shorthand. I think almost no one is paying attention to you or your arguments (Todd seem to be an exception) and no one knows or cares what your shorthand proclamations are intended to convey. This would be the result of your constant hostility towards almost everyone. I'd suggest slowing down, stop shouting and give us a clear and detailed explanation of what you think is happening and why. Rejoin the conversation.

LOL!!!

We are here to debate the Co2 fraud.

The Co2 fraud is outed as fraud.

Those who cannot accept that truth should seek mental health help.

 

[Crick]

We are here to debate the Co2 fraud.

Then perhaps you could actually respond to my post just above where I addressed the justification you have repeatedly given for rejecting greenhouse warming.

The Co2 fraud is outed as fraud.

Just saying it does not make it so. At the very least, you need to give a clear explanation. You have not done so.

Those who cannot accept that truth should seek mental health help.

Those who cannot accept THE truth should seek medical assistance. Those who cannot accept heavily evidenced observations, facts and valid scientific conclusions need to examine themselves and not others.

 

[EMH]

Then perhaps you could actually respond

LOL!!!!

I've documented what happened with the atmospheric temps. You love FUDGE that shows "warming" that DID NOT EXIST in the DATA. That is who and what you are, a liar, a fraud, a traitor, a dedicated hoaxer....

 

[Crick]

LOL!!!!

I've documented what happened with the atmospheric temps.

The documentation you have repeatedly provided REFUTES the claim you've been making. Its TITLE says so.

You love FUDGE that shows "warming" that DID NOT EXIST in the DATA.

There are absolute mountains of data that show warming. The only thing you have been able to produce suggesting otherwise has been refuted and withdrawn years ago. You need to wake up and smell the roses.

 

[EMH]

There are absolute mountains of data that show warming.

You lie.

Only TWO measures of atmospheric temps = satellites and balloons


Mountains of FUDGE your side has. Data has always REFUTED Co2 completely, and does today.

 

[Crick]

You lie.

Only TWO measures of atmospheric temps = satellites and balloons


Mountains of FUDGE your side has. Data has always REFUTED Co2 completely, and does today.

Three plots of global temperature as measured by satelllite. I even used the work of Dr Roy Spencer here.

Satellite temperature measurements - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Major correction to satellite data shows 140% faster warming since 1998

A new paper published in the Journal of Climate reveals that the lower part of the Earth’s atmosphere has warmed much faster since 1979 than scientists relying on satellite data had previously thought.

www.carbonbrief.org

Latest Global Temps « Roy Spencer, PhD

 

[Crick]

You lie.

Only TWO measures of atmospheric temps = satellites and balloons


Mountains of FUDGE your side has. Data has always REFUTED Co2 completely, and does today.

Four plots of global temperature as measured by radiosonde (balloon).

Weather balloons confirm global warming

Temperatures measured at the earth's surface show global warming. Temperatures measured at different altitudes in the atmosphere is as expec...

hpklima.blogspot.com

NOAA shows clear global warming trends over the past 58 years based on radiosonde data

Clear global warming trends of Earth’s ocean, land, lower and atmosphere have been observed over the past 58 years as well as over longer time periods. Radiosondes are used to collect upper air measurements from the troposphere and stratosphere. Most data comes from weather services that launch...

climatefeedback.org

RATPAC – an initial look at the Global Balloon Radiosonde Temperature Series

This post presents the RATPAC A weather balloon temperature profiles through the atmosphere from 85 sampling stations around the globe. The data from troposphere levels confirms the warming trend a…

euanmearns.com

NOAA shows clear global warming trends over the past 58 years based on radiosonde data

Clear global warming trends of Earth’s ocean, land, lower and atmosphere have been observed over the past 58 years as well as over longer time periods. Radiosondes are used to collect upper air measurements from the troposphere and stratosphere. Most data comes from weather services that launch...

climatefeedback.org

 

[EMH]

Three plots of global temperature as measured by satelllite

Nope....

The satellite DATA showed NO WARMING

What you posted is FUDGE, not DATA...

Key claim against global warming evaporates

Satellite and weather balloon data used to argue that climate models were wrong and that global warming isn't really happening turns out to be based on faulty analyses, according to three new studies.

www.nbcnews.com

satellite and weather balloon data have actually suggested the opposite, that the atmosphere was cooling.

Scientists were left with two choices: either the atmosphere wasn't warming up, or something was wrong with the data.




So the choice was

ADMIT THEY ARE COMPLETELY WRONG, that Co2 does NOTHING, terminate their jobs and file for unemployment

or

FUDGE the DATA and keep BILKING the taxpayer

 

[Crick]

Nope....

So, from where do you get your information? Who tells you that satellite and balloon data do not show warming? Who tells you that everyone else on the planet is lying?

Key claim against global warming evaporates

Satellite and weather balloon data used to argue that climate models were wrong and that global warming isn't really happening turns out to be based on faulty analyses, according to three new studies.

www.nbcnews.com

Let's have a look at what's in your link.

Key claim against global warming evaporates​

Satellite and weather balloon data used to argue that climate models were wrong and that global warming isn't really happening turns out to be based on faulty analyses, according to three new studies.​

​

For years, skeptics of global warming have used satellite and weather balloon data to argue that climate models were wrong and that global warming isn't really happening.​

​

Now, according to three new studies published in the journal Science, it turns out those conclusions based on satellite and weather balloon data were based on faulty analyses.​

​

​

The atmosphere is indeed warming, not cooling as the data previously showed.​

​

While surface thermometers have clearly shown that the Earth's surface is warming, satellite and weather balloon data have actually suggested the opposite, that the atmosphere was cooling.​

​

Scientists were left with two choices: either the atmosphere wasn't warming up, or something was wrong with the data.​

​

"But most people had to conclude, based on the fact that there were both satellite and balloon observations, that it really wasn't warming up," said Steven Sherwood, a geologists at Yale University and lead author of one of the studies.​

​

Oops!
Sherwood examined weather balloons known as radiosondes, which are capable of making direct measurements of atmospheric temperatures.​

​

For the past 40 years, radiosonde temperature data have been collected from around the world twice each day, once during the day and once at night.​

​

But while nighttime radiosonde measurements were consistent with climate models and theories showing a general warming trend, daytime measurements actually showed the atmosphere to be cooling since the 1970's.​

​

Sherwood explains these discrepancies by pointing out that the older radiosonde instruments used in the 1970's were not as well shielded from sunlight as more recent models. What this means as that older radiosondes showed warmer temperature readings during the day because they were warmed by sunlight.​

​

"It's like being outside on a hot day—it feels hotter when you are standing in the direct sun than when you are standing in the shade," Sherwood said.​

​

Nowadays, radiosondes are better insulated against the effects of sunlight, but if analyzed together with the old data—which showed temperatures that were actually warmer than they really were—the overall effect looked like the troposphere was cooling.​

​

The discrepancy between surface and atmospheric measurements has been used by for years by skeptics who dispute claims of global warming.​

​

"Now we're learning that the disconnect is more apparent than real," said Ben Santer, an atmospheric scientists at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California and a lead author of another of the studies.​

​

Argument evaporates
According to Santer, the only group to previously analyze satellite data on the troposphere -- the lowest layer in Earth's atmosphere -- was a research team headed by Roy Spencer from University of Alabama in 1992.​

​

"This was used by some critics to say 'We don't believe in climate models, they're wrong,'" Santer told LiveScience. "Other people used the disconnect between what the satellites told and what surface thermometers told us to argue that the surface data were wrong and that earth wasn't really warming because satellites were much more accurate."​

​

The Alabama researchers introduced a correction factor to account for drifting in the satellites used to sample Earth's daily temperature cycles.​

​

But in another Science paper published today, Carl Mears and Rank Wentz, scientists at the California-based Remote Sensing Systems, examined the same data and identified an error in Spencer's analysis technique.​

​

After correcting for the mistake, the researchers obtained fundamentally different results: whereas Spencer's analysis showed a cooling of the Earth's troposphere, the new analysis revealed a warming.​

​

Using the analysis from Mears and Wentz, Santer showed that the new data was consistent with climate models and theories.​

​

"When people come up with extraordinary claims -- like the troposphere is cooling -- then you demand extraordinary proof," Santer said. "What's happening now is that people around the world are subjecting these data sets to the scrutiny they need."​

satellite and weather balloon data have actually suggested the opposite, that the atmosphere was cooling.

Dr Roy Spencer, who has been in charge of collecting that balloon and satellite data used to believe what they told him. When other scientists figured out what was wrong with his data, he resisted, but eventually he saw the light. Most of that warming data I posted for you yesterday came from Spencer.

Scientists were left with two choices: either the atmosphere wasn't warming up, or something was wrong with the data.

This line should have been in quotes as it comes directly from your linked article.

So the choice was

ADMIT THEY ARE COMPLETELY WRONG, that Co2 does NOTHING, terminate their jobs and file for unemployment

or

FUDGE the DATA and keep BILKING the taxpayer

So you believe everyone is lying. Got it. Silly me. I should have realized how discerning you actually were. I just thought you were confused. Now I realize you're a fucking paranoid schizophrenic.

 

[EMH]

Who tells you that satellite and balloon data do not show warming?

THE SATELLITES AND BALLOONS "TELL" me that...

satellite and weather balloon data have actually suggested the opposite, that the atmosphere was cooling.

The satellites and balloons TOLD the WORLD that Co2 went up and atmospheric temps did not....


Then your criminate lying "heroes" FUDGED BOTH with uncorrelated BULLSHIT.

 

[Orangecat]

GREENLAND FROZE WHILE NORTH AMERICA THAWED
The SUN did NOT do that.

Really? What was the thawing attributed to? Giant hair dryers? Would it have happened if there was no sun?
Logic dictates that the sun is at east a contributor to any planetary warming.

 

[EMH]

Really? What was the thawing attributed to? Giant hair dryers? Would it have happened if there was no sun?

Try reading the OP and the thread for a change.

For a continent specific ice age to start on Earth today, land needs to be within 600 miles of an Earth pole. Ellesmere Island in Canada is still there, but the rest of Canada is not, and that "turned off" the Earth Glacier Manufacturing System that put 5 million cubic miles of ice on North America that was still mostly there 1 million years ago.


For climate change purposes, the SUN is a CONSTANT.

Yes, as ice moves away from the poles, the SUN melts it, but that is not CHANGE...

 

[Orangecat]

Try reading the OP and the thread for a change.

Do you deny that the sun has a warming effect on the Earth? Lulz.

 

[EMH]

Do you deny that the sun has a warming effect on the Earth? Lulz.

CONSTANT, not variable.

It is CLIMATE CHANGE, not just climate...

What CHANGES the climate?

The amount of ice on Earth

What causes ice on Earth?

Land near the poles...

90% Earth ice on Antarctica
7% on Greenland
0.3% on Ellesmere Island
0.0% in Texas

 

[Orangecat]

CONSTANT, not variable.

Strange that the temperature drops at night.
The climate has been changing ever since there was a climate. The sun is the greatest single factor that brings warmth to the planet.