More Proof the skeptics are WINNING!!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Falling Sea Level
Ask me how much Im laughing? :coffee::coffee:
Can you explain something to me. When you go to the site you posted you see two graphs near the top showing local sea levels falling. Each graph shows a link below it presumably a source reference. These are the two links that you should click on at your site:

8534720 Atlantic City, New Jersey
8518750 The Battery, New York

Those references show something different with those same two local levels. What is going on?
 
Falling Sea Level
Ask me how much Im laughing? :coffee::coffee:
Can you explain something to me. When you go to the site you posted you see two graphs near the top showing local sea levels falling. Each graph shows a link below it presumably a source reference. These are the two links that you should click on at your site:

8534720 Atlantic City, New Jersey
8518750 The Battery, New York

Those references show something different with those same two local levels. What is going on?

No clue......Im a big picture guy. I see the sea level is falling.........I let the global warming asshats quibble with the millimeter and fractions of a degree stuff!!! :coffee:
 
No clue......Im a big picture guy. I see the sea level is falling.........I let the global warming asshats quibble with the millimeter and fractions of a degree stuff!!! :coffee:
I still don't understand what you are getting at. You say you let the warming asshats quibble with the millimeters etc. But you post a reference that quibbles with millimeters. What's more astonishing, your reference cites graphs that say the sea levels are rising. Ya aint thinkin real good.
This is what your reference cites to show sea levels dropping:
Sea Level Trends - State Selection
 
No clue......Im a big picture guy. I see the sea level is falling.........I let the global warming asshats quibble with the millimeter and fractions of a degree stuff!!! :coffee:
I still don't understand what you are getting at. You say you let the warming asshats quibble with the millimeters etc. But you post a reference that quibbles with millimeters. What's more astonishing, your reference cites graphs that say the sea levels are rising. Ya aint thinkin real good.
This is what your reference cites to show sea levels dropping:
Sea Level Trends - State Selection



Sweetie........think you clicked on the wrong link!!! Here ya go......>>>

Falling Sea Level


A line heading south indicates a reduction btw........standard on all graphs!!! :2up:
 
No clue......Im a big picture guy. I see the sea level is falling.........I let the global warming asshats quibble with the millimeter and fractions of a degree stuff!!! :coffee:
I still don't understand what you are getting at. You say you let the warming asshats quibble with the millimeters etc. But you post a reference that quibbles with millimeters. What's more astonishing, your reference cites graphs that say the sea levels are rising. Ya aint thinkin real good.
This is what your reference cites to show sea levels dropping:
Sea Level Trends - State Selection



Sweetie........think you clicked on the wrong link!!! Here ya go......>>>

Falling Sea Level


A line heading south indicates a reduction btw........standard on all graphs!!! :2up:
At that link you will find a further link under each graph. Click those links.
 
certaintychannel_ipcc_reality.png


How do alarmists get away with lying bigger each time they are shown liars and that their predictions are garbage? The IPCC lying bastards keep spouting they are more certain all the while reality and empirical evidence shows them frauds..

Are people really that stupid?

source
 
Bob Tisdale knocks this one out of the park.. Using the IPCC's own data he shows us that AGW is a scam and that we can not cause a runaway atmospheric problem. ITS NOT POSSIBLE using the IPCC and EPA's own published data..

According to the IPCC, there is not enough fossil carbon on the planet to double the atmospheric CO2 concentration from its current value.


Source

Talk about a kick to the groin...
 
Billy............awesome graph.:rock::rock: What a bunch of schiesters these people are. All fake all the time.

But they continue to lose.............huge. Not sure if you missed it Billy but want to laugh?


[URL=http://s42.photobucket.com/user/baldaltima/media/Gallup%20concerns.png.html][/URL]


Don't spend too much time searching for Climate Change. Its not on there :boobies::boobies:. Its not on there because most people have real responsibilities in life and don't have time for science hobbies.:beer:


Hey Billy.........we are heading at warp speed to 5000 posts on this thread. LMAO.........just makes me laugh when you open up the ENVIRONMENT forum first page and all those lame-ass AGW threads that get about 43 posts and then disappears into the nether-regions of the internet. I think every time they see this thread lurking at the top of the page, these fuckers heads start exploding. :disbelief::eusa_dance::eusa_dance:
 
Balls freezing off in the Midwest and Northeast the next 3-4 days!!!

It's Spring? April to Begin with Snow, Cold Temperatures in Great Lakes and Northeast

Hey Billy........who's not winning?
Skooks, and the comments from the left will be so what it is normal, and then I'll respond as usual with, ok, I thought you said climate was changing? You can't make this shit up can you?


Indeed you cant.........heres some more winning JC....... Poll: Global warming no big threat to USA life

The dolts knock themselves out in this forum something like 17 hours/day..........365 days/year. Still losing huge!!:coffee:
 
Looks like Dr Carl Mears has opp'sied again..It seams that his pause buster RSS change to data and massive up-slope of warming has been caused by errors in mathematical calculation and..... wait for it..... failure to properly calibrate his satellite sensors...

RSSv4-vs-UAH-MT-original-series-550x330.jpg


The evidence suggests that the new RSS v4 MT dataset has spurious warming due to a lack of correction for calibration drift in the NOAA-14 MSU instrument. Somewhat smaller increases in their warming trend are due to their use of a climate model for diurnal drift adjustment, compared to our use of an empirical approach that relies upon observed diurnal drift from the satellite data themselves. While the difference in diurnal drift correction methodolgy is a more legitimate point of contention, in the final analysis independent validation with radiosonde data and most reanalysis datasets suggest better agreement with the UAH product than the RSS product.

Source

Poor scientific practice from what appears to be poor and paid for science.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum List

Back
Top