Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Do you know what a science advisor is?
Al gores was just a mouth peace for James Hansen and quit playing stupid.
Thanks Captain Obvious. Now which one said the Earth was going to burn up in 10 years?
Your like mamooth who keeps on saying the ice age scare of the 1970e was made the up out of thin air ..they had science advisor's
And who knows Jim Hansen? Who is more popular Einstein Al Gore or James Hansen to make a movie?
"mamooth who keeps on saying the ice age scare of the 1970e was made the up out of thin air "
Got a direct quote from that source?
The question was how much cooling effect did the aerosols and particulate matter have verse the rising
CO2 levels.
One gauge of the spread of the uncertainty of the 1970s was a 2008 study in the Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society titled The Myth of the 1970s Global Cooling Scientific Consensus. It was a survey of climate articles published between 1965 and 1979 in the scientific literature, rather than of those published in the mass media. The authors found that 10% of the articles did indeed predict cooling, 28% found the data insufficient to make a prediction either way, and 62% predicted global warming. In other words, 90% of climate articles in scientific journals in the 1970s did not conclude the Earth was cooling. Pretty much the opposite of how it was portrayed in the popular mass media, which shouldn't surprise anyone whose profession is science communication.
About That 1970s Global Cooling...
Do you know what a science advisor is?
Al gores was just a mouth peace for James Hansen and quit playing stupid.
Thanks Captain Obvious. Now which one said the Earth was going to burn up in 10 years?
Your like mamooth who keeps on saying the ice age scare of the 1970e was made the up out of thin air ..they had science advisor's
And who knows Jim Hansen? Who is more popular Einstein Al Gore or James Hansen to make a movie?
"mamooth who keeps on saying the ice age scare of the 1970e was made the up out of thin air "
Got a direct quote from that source?
The question was how much cooling effect did the aerosols and particulate matter have verse the rising
CO2 levels.
One gauge of the spread of the uncertainty of the 1970s was a 2008 study in the Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society titled The Myth of the 1970s Global Cooling Scientific Consensus. It was a survey of climate articles published between 1965 and 1979 in the scientific literature, rather than of those published in the mass media. The authors found that 10% of the articles did indeed predict cooling, 28% found the data insufficient to make a prediction either way, and 62% predicted global warming. In other words, 90% of climate articles in scientific journals in the 1970s did not conclude the Earth was cooling. Pretty much the opposite of how it was portrayed in the popular mass media, which shouldn't surprise anyone whose profession is science communication.
About That 1970s Global Cooling...
And with your link now you get your science from a Writer?
Brian Dunning (author)
Brian Andrew Dunning (born 1965) is an American writer and producer who focuses on science and skepticism.[1]He has hosted a weekly podcast, Skeptoid, since 2006, and he is an author of a series of books on the subject of scientific skepticism, some of which are based on the podcast. Skeptoid has been the recipient of several podcast awards such as the Parsec Award. Dunning also created a Skeptoid spin-off video series, inFact, available on YouTube.
Do you think what the writer wrote was science?
Are you questioning the information he wrote about? The 90-10 split among climate scientist in the 60's-70's? If so do you have another study that you'd care to cite?
His adviser is JAMES HANSEN who the fuck are you trying to fool?
.
So was it James Hansen that said back in 2000 the Earth was going to burn up in 10 years?
What are you trying to say here?
Do you know what a science advisor is?
Al gores was just a mouth peace for James Hansen and quit playing stupid.
Thanks Captain Obvious. Now which one said the Earth was going to burn up in 10 years?
Your like mamooth who keeps on saying the ice age scare of the 1970e was made the up out of thin air ..they had science advisor's
And who knows Jim Hansen? Who is more popular Einstein Al Gore or James Hansen to make a movie?
"mamooth who keeps on saying the ice age scare of the 1970e was made the up out of thin air "
Got a direct quote from that source?
The question was how much cooling effect did the aerosols and particulate matter have verse the rising
CO2 levels.
One gauge of the spread of the uncertainty of the 1970s was a 2008 study in the Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society titled The Myth of the 1970s Global Cooling Scientific Consensus. It was a survey of climate articles published between 1965 and 1979 in the scientific literature, rather than of those published in the mass media. The authors found that 10% of the articles did indeed predict cooling, 28% found the data insufficient to make a prediction either way, and 62% predicted global warming. In other words, 90% of climate articles in scientific journals in the 1970s did not conclude the Earth was cooling. Pretty much the opposite of how it was portrayed in the popular mass media, which shouldn't surprise anyone whose profession is science communication.
About That 1970s Global Cooling...
So was it James Hansen that said back in 2000 the Earth was going to burn up in 10 years?
What are you trying to say here?
Do you know what a science advisor is?
Al gores was just a mouth peace for James Hansen and quit playing stupid.
Thanks Captain Obvious. Now which one said the Earth was going to burn up in 10 years?
Your like mamooth who keeps on saying the ice age scare of the 1970e was made the up out of thin air ..they had science advisor's
And who knows Jim Hansen? Who is more popular Einstein Al Gore or James Hansen to make a movie?
"mamooth who keeps on saying the ice age scare of the 1970e was made the up out of thin air "
Got a direct quote from that source?
The question was how much cooling effect did the aerosols and particulate matter have verse the rising
CO2 levels.
One gauge of the spread of the uncertainty of the 1970s was a 2008 study in the Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society titled The Myth of the 1970s Global Cooling Scientific Consensus. It was a survey of climate articles published between 1965 and 1979 in the scientific literature, rather than of those published in the mass media. The authors found that 10% of the articles did indeed predict cooling, 28% found the data insufficient to make a prediction either way, and 62% predicted global warming. In other words, 90% of climate articles in scientific journals in the 1970s did not conclude the Earth was cooling. Pretty much the opposite of how it was portrayed in the popular mass media, which shouldn't surprise anyone whose profession is science communication.
About That 1970s Global Cooling...
Anyways read this PDF where the dick head Brian Dunning got it from...
Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society titled The Myth of the 1970s Global Cooling Scientific Consensus
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...FAvQQFggjMAE&usg=AOvVaw26i7HmIp7UhfvT-6DrTf-B
Do you know what a science advisor is?
Al gores was just a mouth peace for James Hansen and quit playing stupid.
Thanks Captain Obvious. Now which one said the Earth was going to burn up in 10 years?
Your like mamooth who keeps on saying the ice age scare of the 1970e was made the up out of thin air ..they had science advisor's
And who knows Jim Hansen? Who is more popular Einstein Al Gore or James Hansen to make a movie?
"mamooth who keeps on saying the ice age scare of the 1970e was made the up out of thin air "
Got a direct quote from that source?
The question was how much cooling effect did the aerosols and particulate matter have verse the rising
CO2 levels.
One gauge of the spread of the uncertainty of the 1970s was a 2008 study in the Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society titled The Myth of the 1970s Global Cooling Scientific Consensus. It was a survey of climate articles published between 1965 and 1979 in the scientific literature, rather than of those published in the mass media. The authors found that 10% of the articles did indeed predict cooling, 28% found the data insufficient to make a prediction either way, and 62% predicted global warming. In other words, 90% of climate articles in scientific journals in the 1970s did not conclude the Earth was cooling. Pretty much the opposite of how it was portrayed in the popular mass media, which shouldn't surprise anyone whose profession is science communication.
About That 1970s Global Cooling...
Anyways read this PDF where the dick head Brian Dunning got it from...
Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society titled The Myth of the 1970s Global Cooling Scientific Consensus
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...FAvQQFggjMAE&usg=AOvVaw26i7HmIp7UhfvT-6DrTf-B
From My PDF link
THE GLOBAL TEMPERATURE RECORDS:
A COOLING TREND. Efforts to accumulate and organize global temperature records began in
the 1870s (Somerville et al. 2007). The first analysis to show long-term warming trends was published
in 1938. However, such analyses were not updated very often. Indeed, the Earth appeared to have been
cooling for more than 2 decades when scientists first took note of the change in trend in the 1960s. The
seminal work was done by J. Murray Mitchell, who, in 1963, presented the first up-to-date temperature
reconstruction showing that a global cooling trend had begun in the 1940s. Mitchell used data from
nearly 200 weather stations, collected by the World Weather Records project under the auspices of the World Meteorological Organization, to calculate latitudinal average temperature. His analysis showed
that global temperatures had increased fairly steadily from the 1880s, the start of his record, until about 1940, before the start of a steady multidecade cooling (Mitchell 1963).By the early 1970s, when Mitchell updated his work
(Mitchell 1972), the notion of a global cooling trend was widely accepted, albeit poorly understood. The first satellite records showed increasing snow and ice cover across the Northern Hemisphere from the late
1960s to the early 1970s. This trend was capped by unusually severe winters in Asia and parts of North
America in 1972 and 1973 (Kukla and Kukla 1974
Did they say the 70s were unusually cold?
Not really. It is all part of a natural cycle that has been occurring for the past 3 million years.
Do you know what a science advisor is?
Al gores was just a mouth peace for James Hansen and quit playing stupid.
Thanks Captain Obvious. Now which one said the Earth was going to burn up in 10 years?
Your like mamooth who keeps on saying the ice age scare of the 1970e was made the up out of thin air ..they had science advisor's
And who knows Jim Hansen? Who is more popular Einstein Al Gore or James Hansen to make a movie?
"mamooth who keeps on saying the ice age scare of the 1970e was made the up out of thin air "
Got a direct quote from that source?
The question was how much cooling effect did the aerosols and particulate matter have verse the rising
CO2 levels.
One gauge of the spread of the uncertainty of the 1970s was a 2008 study in the Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society titled The Myth of the 1970s Global Cooling Scientific Consensus. It was a survey of climate articles published between 1965 and 1979 in the scientific literature, rather than of those published in the mass media. The authors found that 10% of the articles did indeed predict cooling, 28% found the data insufficient to make a prediction either way, and 62% predicted global warming. In other words, 90% of climate articles in scientific journals in the 1970s did not conclude the Earth was cooling. Pretty much the opposite of how it was portrayed in the popular mass media, which shouldn't surprise anyone whose profession is science communication.
About That 1970s Global Cooling...
Anyways read this PDF where the dick head Brian Dunning got it from...
Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society titled The Myth of the 1970s Global Cooling Scientific Consensus
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...FAvQQFggjMAE&usg=AOvVaw26i7HmIp7UhfvT-6DrTf-B
From My PDF link
THE GLOBAL TEMPERATURE RECORDS:
A COOLING TREND. Efforts to accumulate and organize global temperature records began in
the 1870s (Somerville et al. 2007). The first analysis to show long-term warming trends was published
in 1938. However, such analyses were not updated very often. Indeed, the Earth appeared to have been
cooling for more than 2 decades when scientists first took note of the change in trend in the 1960s. The
seminal work was done by J. Murray Mitchell, who, in 1963, presented the first up-to-date temperature
reconstruction showing that a global cooling trend had begun in the 1940s. Mitchell used data from
nearly 200 weather stations, collected by the World Weather Records project under the auspices of the World Meteorological Organization, to calculate latitudinal average temperature. His analysis showed
that global temperatures had increased fairly steadily from the 1880s, the start of his record, until about 1940, before the start of a steady multidecade cooling (Mitchell 1963).By the early 1970s, when Mitchell updated his work
(Mitchell 1972), the notion of a global cooling trend was widely accepted, albeit poorly understood. The first satellite records showed increasing snow and ice cover across the Northern Hemisphere from the late
1960s to the early 1970s. This trend was capped by unusually severe winters in Asia and parts of North
America in 1972 and 1973 (Kukla and Kukla 1974
The GISS maturity graph, and specific info for two dates. The major version change at the end of 2012 is vary visible.
A more suspicious mind than mine would wonder why climate4you chose jan1910 rather than jan1915 like in the NCDC graphs.
Did they say the 70s were unusually cold?
nothing to do with my point, but man, you specialize in just trying to change the subject, don't you?
Not really. It is all part of a natural cycle that has been occurring for the past 3 million years.
Congrats, you learned "how to lie with Charts!" The Koch brothers will be sending your diploma shortly.
It's true, I'm not going to let you mention how cold the 70s were and then avoid my questions.
The GISS maturity graph, and specific info for two dates. The major version change at the end of 2012 is vary visible.
A more suspicious mind than mine would wonder why climate4you chose jan1910 rather than jan1915 like in the NCDC graphs.
Yes, yes, 95% of Climate scientist are getting it wrong, but you can read a graph, you think. Got it.
It's true, I'm not going to let you mention how cold the 70s were and then avoid my questions.
Well, when you ask an honest question, then I'll engage you like an adult.
What part of CO2 does not drive climate change did you not understand?But the real question is: are humans accelerating the natural warming, how and by how much?We hear a lot about how temperatures have begun to spike over the last 200 years, and they have too. In fact if one were to only look at the temperature data (from NASA) of the last 2000 years, they would naturally conclude that something was wrong. Here we see a declining temperature for 1800 years and then an abrupt uptick approximately 200 years ago. Pretty alarming, right?The earth is being warmed unnaturally by humans at a fairly rapid rate. Interglacial period or not, humans are having some effect.There's no problem, Joe.You worship science right up to the point it disagrees with you, Joe.
Too bad you don't know diddly squat about science, Joe.
I know enough to know we have a real fucking problem.
This is what I don't get about deniers. I can get having a valid disagreement on what to do about it, but the science is the science. CO2 traps heat. Human beings have increased CO2 levels well above normal levels at an accellerated rate.
We're in an interglacial cycle.
That's what they look like.
Not really. It is all part of a natural cycle that has been occurring for the past 3 million years. This is the temperature data for the last 800,000 years (also from NASA). The peaks are the interglacial cycles and the troughs are the glacial cycles. From this data we can see two very important things. 1. that our current temperature is still 2C below the peaks of three of the last four interglacial temperature peaks and 2. that the temperature data for the past 2,000 years - where there is a declining temperature following by a sharp reversal - is seen in every interglacial cycle. It has the shape of a saw tooth. So our current temperature is within the normal range of an interglacial cycle, and the spike of the last 200 years which was preceded by an 1800 year decline is a normal saw tooth behavior that is seen in every interglacial cycle.
We aren't doing anything to the climate.So you think we should all be ignorant of what humans are doing to climate?But the real question is: are humans accelerating the natural warming, how and by how much?We hear a lot about how temperatures have begun to spike over the last 200 years, and they have too. In fact if one were to only look at the temperature data (from NASA) of the last 2000 years, they would naturally conclude that something was wrong. Here we see a declining temperature for 1800 years and then an abrupt uptick approximately 200 years ago. Pretty alarming, right?The earth is being warmed unnaturally by humans at a fairly rapid rate. Interglacial period or not, humans are having some effect.There's no problem, Joe.
We're in an interglacial cycle.
That's what they look like.
Not really. It is all part of a natural cycle that has been occurring for the past 3 million years. This is the temperature data for the last 800,000 years (also from NASA). The peaks are the interglacial cycles and the troughs are the glacial cycles. From this data we can see two very important things. 1. that our current temperature is still 2C below the peaks of three of the last four interglacial temperature peaks and 2. that the temperature data for the past 2,000 years - where there is a declining temperature following by a sharp reversal - is seen in every interglacial cycle. It has the shape of a saw tooth. So our current temperature is within the normal range of an interglacial cycle, and the spike of the last 200 years which was preceded by an 1800 year decline is a normal saw tooth behavior that is seen in every interglacial cycle.
No, the REAL questions are what is the optimum temperature and how do you know?
If 95% of scientists are on your side and the data is on your side, why does your side need to keep cheating?
You said we had real winters when you were growing up in the 70s.
Were the 70s unusually cold?
If 95% of scientists are on your side and the data is on your side, why does your side need to keep cheating?
Except they don't. That's only a crazy claim the deniers came up with.
The deniers are too dumb to understand the science.
You said we had real winters when you were growing up in the 70s.
Were the 70s unusually cold?
Wasn't the point I was making and you know it... this is why talking to you is a waste.
Yes, yes, 95% of Climate scientist are getting it wrong, but you can read a graph, you think. Got it.
Right. All those adjustments to historical temperatures.
Perfectly normal. Happens all the time.
