Is the US Midwest a planet? Places colder than normal vs. Places warmer than normal

[westwall]

climate fake news website is a known fraud. Try using something that is legitimate.

NASA disagrees and while you can't plant an argument in a winning position, NASA can send people to plant a flag on the MOON and bring them back - safely

No, NASA GISS is who you are referring to, and they are a joke. The rest of NASA, on the other hand, is populated by incredibly competent people.

HUUUUUGE difference.

You're just not clever enough to figure that fact out.

No, NASA disagrees with you.

sorry

but

factual truths are not on your side

Wrong, dude. NASA GISS, which is an entirely different animal from the real NASA. Even NASA says so...

NASA Data Worse Than Climate-Gate Data, Space Agency Admits

NASA was able to put a man on the moon, but the space agency can't tell you what the temperature was when it did. By its own admission, NASA's temperature records are in even worse shape than the besmirched Climate-gate data.

E-mail messages obtained by a Freedom of Information Act request reveal that NASA concluded that its own climate findings were inferior to those maintained by both the University of East Anglia's Climatic Research Unit (CRU) -- the scandalized source of the leaked Climate-gate e-mails -- and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's National Climatic Data Center.

NASA Data Worse Than Climate-Gate Data, Space Agency Admits

Funny you should bring this up!
I remember sumthin' about O-Rings failing on a launch in freezing temps.
People were on that rocket, weren't they?

Indeed they were. NASA was vehemently denying the facts until my buddy Feynman, demonstrated the reality in front of the whole world. Needless to say NASA never invited him back!

 

[JBvM]

Feel free to show empirical data, not computer derived fiction. In a Court of law it is data that wins over fiction every single time.

In a court of law you believe people like you would be considered experts versus the scientific community?

ok

Well, I actually have a degree in the earth sciences, how about you? I am qualified to teach any climatology class out there. On the other hand a PhD climatologist wouldn't be able to teach even one of my third year undergrad classes without a ton of work to get up to snuff. Other than that did you have a point or are you merely flailing away hoping something will stick?

you have a degree?

tell me -- Trump University?

 

[JBvM]

Well, I actually have a degree in the earth sciences, how about you? I am qualified to teach any climatology class out there. On the other hand a PhD climatologist wouldn't be able to teach even one of my third year undergrad classes without a ton of work to get up to snuff. Other than that did you have a point or are you merely flailing away hoping something will stick?

I've known terrible lawyers, terrible plumbers, and terrible professors. Claiming a degree and expertise alone makes one correct is hilarious. NASA landed men on the Moon and brought them back - safely

 

[JBvM]

NASA disagrees and while you can't plant an argument in a winning position, NASA can send people to plant a flag on the MOON and bring them back - safely

No, NASA GISS is who you are referring to, and they are a joke. The rest of NASA, on the other hand, is populated by incredibly competent people.

HUUUUUGE difference.

You're just not clever enough to figure that fact out.

No, NASA disagrees with you.

sorry

but

factual truths are not on your side

Wrong, dude. NASA GISS, which is an entirely different animal from the real NASA. Even NASA says so...

NASA Data Worse Than Climate-Gate Data, Space Agency Admits

NASA was able to put a man on the moon, but the space agency can't tell you what the temperature was when it did. By its own admission, NASA's temperature records are in even worse shape than the besmirched Climate-gate data.

E-mail messages obtained by a Freedom of Information Act request reveal that NASA concluded that its own climate findings were inferior to those maintained by both the University of East Anglia's Climatic Research Unit (CRU) -- the scandalized source of the leaked Climate-gate e-mails -- and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's National Climatic Data Center.

NASA Data Worse Than Climate-Gate Data, Space Agency Admits

Funny you should bring this up!
I remember sumthin' about O-Rings failing on a launch in freezing temps.
People were on that rocket, weren't they?

Indeed they were. NASA was vehemently denying the facts until my buddy Feynman, demonstrated the reality in front of the whole world. Needless to say NASA never invited him back!

your claims are bullshit

 

[westwall]

No, NASA GISS is who you are referring to, and they are a joke. The rest of NASA, on the other hand, is populated by incredibly competent people.

HUUUUUGE difference.

You're just not clever enough to figure that fact out.

No, NASA disagrees with you.

sorry

but

factual truths are not on your side

Wrong, dude. NASA GISS, which is an entirely different animal from the real NASA. Even NASA says so...

NASA Data Worse Than Climate-Gate Data, Space Agency Admits

NASA was able to put a man on the moon, but the space agency can't tell you what the temperature was when it did. By its own admission, NASA's temperature records are in even worse shape than the besmirched Climate-gate data.

E-mail messages obtained by a Freedom of Information Act request reveal that NASA concluded that its own climate findings were inferior to those maintained by both the University of East Anglia's Climatic Research Unit (CRU) -- the scandalized source of the leaked Climate-gate e-mails -- and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's National Climatic Data Center.

NASA Data Worse Than Climate-Gate Data, Space Agency Admits

Funny you should bring this up!
I remember sumthin' about O-Rings failing on a launch in freezing temps.
People were on that rocket, weren't they?

Indeed they were. NASA was vehemently denying the facts until my buddy Feynman, demonstrated the reality in front of the whole world. Needless to say NASA never invited him back!

your claims are bullshit

Then disprove them.

 

[JBvM]

The Feynman bullshit

NASA Climate 'Skeptics' Respond with Science! Just Kidding.

As Skeptical Science readers are undoubtely well aware, the impact of natural climate drivers has been very thoroughly studied, and they simply cannot account for the observed global warming or climate change, especially over the past 50-65 years (Figure 1).

----------------------------------------​

Over at Scholars and Rogues, Brian Angliss tears it apart for the sham that it is. It’s a pretty good review that destroys the claims made in the letter and has plenty of links to back up the debunking.​

More debunking of the ex-NASA 49 climate change deniers - Bad Astronomy

 

[JBvM]

Then disprove them.

I don't pretend to be a scientist, but there are links out there to scientists that do just what you ask. You just choose to ignore them..

 

[JBvM]

No, NASA GISS is who you are referring to, and they are a joke.

funny how they predict people like you would go there LOL

Contrarians for Censoring Climate Science

These 49 former NASA employees wrote this letter to the current NASA administrator requesting that he effectively muzzle the climate scientists at NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS).


"We, the undersigned, respectfully request that NASA and the Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) refrain from including unproven remarks in public releases and websites."


Since nothing in science is ever proven, apparently these individuals simply don't want NASA GISS to discuss science in their public releases or websites anymore. What specifically do they object to?


"We believe the claims by NASA and GISS, that man-made carbon dioxide is having a catastrophic impact on global climate change are not substantiated, especially when considering thousands of years of empirical data. With hundreds of well-known climate scientists and tens of thousands of other scientists publicly declaring their disbelief in the catastrophic forecasts, coming particularly from the GISS leadership, it is clear that the science is NOT settled."


Ah yes, the ever-more-popular goalpost shift of "catastrophic climate change". The letter of course provides no examples of NASA GISS public releases or websites claiming that CO2 is having a catastrophic impact on climate change, and of course provides zero examples of these mysterious "hundreds of well-known climate scientists and tens of thousands of other scientists" who disbelieve these unspecified catastrophic claims. As is always the case with these types of letters, it is all rhetoric and no substance.
NASA Climate 'Skeptics' Respond with Science! Just Kidding.
​

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Why do we confuse weather and climate? - The Kid Should See This

Why do we confuse weather and climate? - The Kid Should See This



Feb. 1, 2005 NASA - What's the Difference Between Weather and Climate?

NASA - What's the Difference Between Weather and Climate?

No, no, no, no! Everyone knows that when it is hot it is "climate" and when it is cold it is "weather" You progressive loons are always claiming that!

These U.S. Cities Are Proactively Planning for Climate Change

Climate
These U.S. Cities Are Proactively Planning for Climate Change

Guided by science, coastal hubs like the Bay Area are building in resiliency before disaster ensues.

Just because commie-run cities are wasting resources does not prove humans are altering climate.

 

[JBvM]

Why do we confuse weather and climate? - The Kid Should See This

Why do we confuse weather and climate? - The Kid Should See This



Feb. 1, 2005 NASA - What's the Difference Between Weather and Climate?

NASA - What's the Difference Between Weather and Climate?

No, no, no, no! Everyone knows that when it is hot it is "climate" and when it is cold it is "weather" You progressive loons are always claiming that!

These U.S. Cities Are Proactively Planning for Climate Change

Climate
These U.S. Cities Are Proactively Planning for Climate Change

Guided by science, coastal hubs like the Bay Area are building in resiliency before disaster ensues.

Just because commie-run cities are wasting resources does not prove humans are altering climate.

witth comments about commies, I wonder why you bother to get out of bed every day - or do you?

 

[Manonthestreet]

 

[toobfreak]

While liberals talk about planet Earth, conservatives focus on the Midwest (They always get stuck in a region).
Here's a map with colder vs warmer than average temperatures right now.
Enjoy:

Fact of the matter is that when Leftards talk about planet Earth, they always get stuck in a lie. As having more than a casual knowledge of graphics and documents, I couldn't help but notice that in your chart, either by accident or on purpose, while the blue in the bar-graph faded on gradually from 0 then faded out rather quickly to the left, the shading of pinks used in the chart took on a much more visible presence sooner and remained very noticeable to the eye far longer almost all the way to the right. Part of that is the eye's own natural greater sensitivity to red over blue. This had the effect of making the reds seem much more dominant over the blue areas. However, adjusting the charts color strengths and intensities a bit, I brought out the blue a bit more giving it at least an equal chance to be seen in the chart:

What it actually shows is is:

1). That while much of the warmer regions have moved farther northward and south, the coldest air masses have simply moved to more temperate regions.

2). Despite that much of the far North remains colder than normal.

3). Most of our oceans remain largely unchanged.

4). While large areas of Antarctica are warmer, many areas are colder as well.

5). Parts of the northern oceans are warmer, most notably the Gulf Stream, yet other areas are cooler, such as north of Hawaii, Florida, the North Atlantic, the ocean of Japan, and most of the southern ocean.

6). Nearly all of North America is in a deep freeze other than the west coast and Alaska.

TAKEN AS A WHOLE, this chart is rather weak evidence for global warming, rather, for a redistribution of temperature masses. One can debate the causes, whether they be man made aerosols or some other force, but a few facts can be drawn:

1). Coming off of a solar perihelion, the southern hemisphere SHOULD be warmer, yet it is warmer over Antarctica and colder over the adjacent ocean.

2). Coming off of a solar perihelion, the northern hemisphere SHOULD be colder, and it is, except that rather than it being distributed more, the cold air is concentrated into local masses in N. America, Greenland, England, Scandinavia, Siberia, Mongolia and India.

If the planet were truly warming, it should show few places actually cooling off. Instead, what we merely see is a reshuffling in the distribution of temperate masses that if mixed together, would tend to nearly cancel out for a zero sum gain. One chart alone doesn't prove a thing, but rather than global warming, your chart suggests that some places are merely warmer than others while many others much colder, yet the colder regions seem to be getting (deliberately) ignored.

Oh and BTW, worth pointing out is that all the areas that are white, they indicate no change at all.

 

[Oddball]

Indeed they were. NASA was vehemently denying the facts until my buddy Feynman, demonstrated the reality in front of the whole world. Needless to say NASA never invited him back!

Feynman was a demi-god...Wish I could have known about and learned from him while he was still with us.

 

[westwall]

Well, I actually have a degree in the earth sciences, how about you? I am qualified to teach any climatology class out there. On the other hand a PhD climatologist wouldn't be able to teach even one of my third year undergrad classes without a ton of work to get up to snuff. Other than that did you have a point or are you merely flailing away hoping something will stick?

I've known terrible lawyers, terrible plumbers, and terrible professors. Claiming a degree and expertise alone makes one correct is hilarious. NASA landed men on the Moon and brought them back - safely

Indeed they did. But not GISS. Color me unsurprised that you can't understand the difference. You must be a sock of lefty looney, you have the same sort of moronic response.

 

[westwall]

Indeed they were. NASA was vehemently denying the facts until my buddy Feynman, demonstrated the reality in front of the whole world. Needless to say NASA never invited him back!

Feynman was a demi-god...Wish I could have known about and learned from him while he was still with us.

He was amazing. I had the privilege of enjoying dinner with him on many an occasion, both at his home and mine, and in addition to being incredibly funny, he was capable of carrying on a discussion about almost anything. He was a true polymath.

 

[westwall]

Then disprove them.

I don't pretend to be a scientist, but there are links out there to scientists that do just what you ask. You just choose to ignore them..

Yeah, it's kind of obvious that you are scientifically ignorant. Anybody with a brain can describe the scientific method, and show how the climatologists violate it all of the time. But that would be...well, you know....SCIENCE!

And we all know that you anti science silly people don't do science. You pay homage to the fake gods of pseudo science.

 

[Oddball]

He was amazing. I had the privilege of enjoying dinner with him on many an occasion, both at his home and mine, and in addition to being incredibly funny, he was capable of carrying on a discussion about almost anything. He was a true polymath.

I love the story about his skepticism of the efficacy of hypnosis, until he got hypnotized and couldn't resist doing what it was suggested that he do.

 

[westwall]

He was amazing. I had the privilege of enjoying dinner with him on many an occasion, both at his home and mine, and in addition to being incredibly funny, he was capable of carrying on a discussion about almost anything. He was a true polymath.

I love the story about his skepticism of the efficacy of hypnosis, until he got hypnotized and couldn't resist doing what it was suggested that he do.

Yeah, we actually talked about that experience. He described it as making his skin crawl. He desperately wanted to not follow the suggestion, but it was so uncomfortable that he did it.

 

[Oddball]

He was amazing. I had the privilege of enjoying dinner with him on many an occasion, both at his home and mine, and in addition to being incredibly funny, he was capable of carrying on a discussion about almost anything. He was a true polymath.

I love the story about his skepticism of the efficacy of hypnosis, until he got hypnotized and couldn't resist doing what it was suggested that he do.

Yeah, we actually talked about that experience. He described it as making his skin crawl. He desperately wanted to not follow the suggestion, but it was so uncomfortable that he did it.

It's counter-intuitive that the highly intelligent can't be hypnotized...Since they have far more active and powerful imaginations, it's actually easier...It's the dullards who are tough.