NOAA Data: No warming for last 58 years!!!

[jc456]

And yet most of the world's population accepts the scientists and carries on making policies to develop new energy sources and fight climate change.
Yep, the 'alarmists' are losing all right...oh, wait...

they do? where are those numbers at?

 

[westwall]

And yet most of the world's population accepts the scientists and carries on making policies to develop new energy sources and fight climate change.
Yep, the 'alarmists' are losing all right...oh, wait...

No, they actually don't. In the comments sections of every paper when there is a AGW story the comments are OVERWHELMINGY anti AGW. The people figured out a long time ago that the warmists are full of crap. It has gotten so bad for the AGW crowd that most of the AGW news "stories" have their comments turned off now.

 

[flacaltenn]

More bad news for the AGW k00ks.........evidently, the NOAA has been hiding 21 years on their graphs!!!

NOAA Radiosonde Data Shows No Warming For 58 Years | Real Science


LOL.....still a sham.

Another "you shouldn't believe everything you read", but you should only believe what I tell you to believe.

Either way........not mattering s0n!!!

You mean, you'll believe anything you want, and only take those facts that prove your argument and ignore everything else?

There's a certain significance to having scientific data from 80 yrs ago. WHATEVER shape it's in. Because it serves as a sanity check against the latest theories of GW. So when NOAA cuts and pastes the RECENT weather balloon readings to IGNORE the older the data that doesn't agree with their historic reconstructions --- YOU MUST pay attention to what their motivations might have been..

The current radiosonde data is in EXCELLENT agreement with the current era satellite data. So there's no reason to believe the older data is not useful. And both of those USED TO agree with the surface data records before NOAA and Hadley and others started to "correct" it..

Nobody's ignoring ANYTHING son. That's how you determine the truth..

 

[frigidweirdo]

More bad news for the AGW k00ks.........evidently, the NOAA has been hiding 21 years on their graphs!!!

NOAA Radiosonde Data Shows No Warming For 58 Years | Real Science


LOL.....still a sham.

Another "you shouldn't believe everything you read", but you should only believe what I tell you to believe.

Either way........not mattering s0n!!!

You mean, you'll believe anything you want, and only take those facts that prove your argument and ignore everything else?

Indeed s0n........4 billion "consensus" research articles published and it hasn't added up to dick in the real world. Solar power is still a joke......well less than 1% and decades from now will still be less than 5%. Same with wind.....and that the only thing I care about and what everybody should be caring about lest their electricity bills DOUBLE due to carbon taxes..........over a huge-ass hoax. Fuck that........so yes, I revel in the winning in this forum!! In fact, skeptics on this forum have been running an ePiC thread in here that is nothing but winning >> More Proof the skeptics are WINNING!! ..........153,000 "views" and soon to be 5,000 posts!!! sIcK

So, basically, the only thing you care about is money. Well, it must suck to be a person like you.

 

[frigidweirdo]

More bad news for the AGW k00ks.........evidently, the NOAA has been hiding 21 years on their graphs!!!

NOAA Radiosonde Data Shows No Warming For 58 Years | Real Science


LOL.....still a sham.

Another "you shouldn't believe everything you read", but you should only believe what I tell you to believe.

Either way........not mattering s0n!!!

You mean, you'll believe anything you want, and only take those facts that prove your argument and ignore everything else?

There's a certain significance to having scientific data from 80 yrs ago. WHATEVER shape it's in. Because it serves as a sanity check against the latest theories of GW. So when NOAA cuts and pastes the RECENT weather balloon readings to IGNORE the older the data that doesn't agree with their historic reconstructions --- YOU MUST pay attention to what their motivations might have been..

The current radiosonde data is in EXCELLENT agreement with the current era satellite data. So there's no reason to believe the older data is not useful. And both of those USED TO agree with the surface data records before NOAA and Hadley and others started to "correct" it..

Nobody's ignoring ANYTHING son. That's how you determine the truth..

Anyone who presents data which is wrong must be shown for what they are.

However what we have here is a guy who is basically willing to ignore good data when it doesn't suit him, and then when something that supports his theory, he'll go tell everyone how right he is and look, all the evidence (he chooses to accept) proves he is right.

This sort of mentality is just ridiculous.

 

[Billy_Bob]

More bad news for the AGW k00ks.........evidently, the NOAA has been hiding 21 years on their graphs!!!

NOAA Radiosonde Data Shows No Warming For 58 Years | Real Science


LOL.....still a sham.

Another "you shouldn't believe everything you read", but you should only believe what I tell you to believe.

Either way........not mattering s0n!!!

You mean, you'll believe anything you want, and only take those facts that prove your argument and ignore everything else?

There's a certain significance to having scientific data from 80 yrs ago. WHATEVER shape it's in. Because it serves as a sanity check against the latest theories of GW. So when NOAA cuts and pastes the RECENT weather balloon readings to IGNORE the older the data that doesn't agree with their historic reconstructions --- YOU MUST pay attention to what their motivations might have been..

The current radiosonde data is in EXCELLENT agreement with the current era satellite data. So there's no reason to believe the older data is not useful. And both of those USED TO agree with the surface data records before NOAA and Hadley and others started to "correct" it..

Nobody's ignoring ANYTHING son. That's how you determine the truth..

Anyone who presents data which is wrong must be shown for what they are.

However what we have here is a guy who is basically willing to ignore good data when it doesn't suit him, and then when something that supports his theory, he'll go tell everyone how right he is and look, all the evidence (he chooses to accept) proves he is right.

This sort of mentality is just ridiculous.

Wow.. What a mental midget..

You cant even be honest with yourself and the facts presented.. You have to make shit up and whine.. Your Ok with FRAUD because it moves your agenda forward..

The stupidity, It burns...

 

[skookerasbil]

More bad news for the AGW k00ks.........evidently, the NOAA has been hiding 21 years on their graphs!!!

NOAA Radiosonde Data Shows No Warming For 58 Years | Real Science


LOL.....still a sham.

Another "you shouldn't believe everything you read", but you should only believe what I tell you to believe.

Either way........not mattering s0n!!!

You mean, you'll believe anything you want, and only take those facts that prove your argument and ignore everything else?

Indeed s0n........4 billion "consensus" research articles published and it hasn't added up to dick in the real world. Solar power is still a joke......well less than 1% and decades from now will still be less than 5%. Same with wind.....and that the only thing I care about and what everybody should be caring about lest their electricity bills DOUBLE due to carbon taxes..........over a huge-ass hoax. Fuck that........so yes, I revel in the winning in this forum!! In fact, skeptics on this forum have been running an ePiC thread in here that is nothing but winning >> More Proof the skeptics are WINNING!! ..........153,000 "views" and soon to be 5,000 posts!!! sIcK

So, basically, the only thing you care about is money. Well, it must suck to be a person like you.

So much winning in here I cant stand it sometimes.............

Oh......and I just hate seeing people fucked over due to contrived crap and yes.....somebody like me with real responsibilities in life cant afford to be a Disney idealist like some others. Anyway, most people who are duped by "global warming" have no clue about the real agenda and whats its been from the very beginning......all the people in this world who have no care for "costs".


ghey

 

[skookerasbil]

The Green Agenda

 

[skookerasbil]

More bad news for the AGW k00ks.........evidently, the NOAA has been hiding 21 years on their graphs!!!

NOAA Radiosonde Data Shows No Warming For 58 Years | Real Science


LOL.....still a sham.

Another "you shouldn't believe everything you read", but you should only believe what I tell you to believe.

Either way........not mattering s0n!!!

You mean, you'll believe anything you want, and only take those facts that prove your argument and ignore everything else?

There's a certain significance to having scientific data from 80 yrs ago. WHATEVER shape it's in. Because it serves as a sanity check against the latest theories of GW. So when NOAA cuts and pastes the RECENT weather balloon readings to IGNORE the older the data that doesn't agree with their historic reconstructions --- YOU MUST pay attention to what their motivations might have been..

The current radiosonde data is in EXCELLENT agreement with the current era satellite data. So there's no reason to believe the older data is not useful. And both of those USED TO agree with the surface data records before NOAA and Hadley and others started to "correct" it..

Nobody's ignoring ANYTHING son. That's how you determine the truth..

Anyone who presents data which is wrong must be shown for what they are.

However what we have here is a guy who is basically willing to ignore good data when it doesn't suit him, and then when something that supports his theory, he'll go tell everyone how right he is and look, all the evidence (he chooses to accept) proves he is right.

This sort of mentality is just ridiculous.

Indeed......but a huge majority don't have your mentality because they don't care............


[URL='http://s42.photobucket.com/user/baldaltima/media/pew-priorities.jpg.html'][/URL]



s0n.....get some real responsibilities in life and you wont be worrying about stoopid shit!!

 

[frigidweirdo]

Another "you shouldn't believe everything you read", but you should only believe what I tell you to believe.

Either way........not mattering s0n!!!

You mean, you'll believe anything you want, and only take those facts that prove your argument and ignore everything else?

There's a certain significance to having scientific data from 80 yrs ago. WHATEVER shape it's in. Because it serves as a sanity check against the latest theories of GW. So when NOAA cuts and pastes the RECENT weather balloon readings to IGNORE the older the data that doesn't agree with their historic reconstructions --- YOU MUST pay attention to what their motivations might have been..

The current radiosonde data is in EXCELLENT agreement with the current era satellite data. So there's no reason to believe the older data is not useful. And both of those USED TO agree with the surface data records before NOAA and Hadley and others started to "correct" it..

Nobody's ignoring ANYTHING son. That's how you determine the truth..

Anyone who presents data which is wrong must be shown for what they are.

However what we have here is a guy who is basically willing to ignore good data when it doesn't suit him, and then when something that supports his theory, he'll go tell everyone how right he is and look, all the evidence (he chooses to accept) proves he is right.

This sort of mentality is just ridiculous.

Indeed......but a huge majority don't have your mentality because they don't care............




']

[/URL]']

[/URL]']s0n.....get some real responsibilities in life and you wont be worrying about stoopid shit!![/URL]

Wow, two posts and nothing said that is worthy of a reply.

 

[flacaltenn]

And yet most of the world's population accepts the scientists and carries on making policies to develop new energy sources and fight climate change.
Yep, the 'alarmists' are losing all right...oh, wait...

No, they actually don't. In the comments sections of every paper when there is a AGW story the comments are OVERWHELMINGY anti AGW. The people figured out a long time ago that the warmists are full of crap. It has gotten so bad for the AGW crowd that most of the AGW news "stories" have their comments turned off now.

And ................ the LA Times will not PRINT Op Eds from skeptical perspectives. Bunch of chickens actually.. Or vultures -- if they know they are playing defense for "the team"..

 

[flacaltenn]

More bad news for the AGW k00ks.........evidently, the NOAA has been hiding 21 years on their graphs!!!

NOAA Radiosonde Data Shows No Warming For 58 Years | Real Science


LOL.....still a sham.

Another "you shouldn't believe everything you read", but you should only believe what I tell you to believe.

Either way........not mattering s0n!!!

You mean, you'll believe anything you want, and only take those facts that prove your argument and ignore everything else?

There's a certain significance to having scientific data from 80 yrs ago. WHATEVER shape it's in. Because it serves as a sanity check against the latest theories of GW. So when NOAA cuts and pastes the RECENT weather balloon readings to IGNORE the older the data that doesn't agree with their historic reconstructions --- YOU MUST pay attention to what their motivations might have been..

The current radiosonde data is in EXCELLENT agreement with the current era satellite data. So there's no reason to believe the older data is not useful. And both of those USED TO agree with the surface data records before NOAA and Hadley and others started to "correct" it..

Nobody's ignoring ANYTHING son. That's how you determine the truth..

Anyone who presents data which is wrong must be shown for what they are.

However what we have here is a guy who is basically willing to ignore good data when it doesn't suit him, and then when something that supports his theory, he'll go tell everyone how right he is and look, all the evidence (he chooses to accept) proves he is right.

This sort of mentality is just ridiculous.

I was talking about the data that was omitted from the NOAA article because it would have been embarrassing.
If you focus on personalities --- you'll never see why the science ain't even close to settled.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Another "you shouldn't believe everything you read", but you should only believe what I tell you to believe.

Either way........not mattering s0n!!!

You mean, you'll believe anything you want, and only take those facts that prove your argument and ignore everything else?

There's a certain significance to having scientific data from 80 yrs ago. WHATEVER shape it's in. Because it serves as a sanity check against the latest theories of GW. So when NOAA cuts and pastes the RECENT weather balloon readings to IGNORE the older the data that doesn't agree with their historic reconstructions --- YOU MUST pay attention to what their motivations might have been..

The current radiosonde data is in EXCELLENT agreement with the current era satellite data. So there's no reason to believe the older data is not useful. And both of those USED TO agree with the surface data records before NOAA and Hadley and others started to "correct" it..

Nobody's ignoring ANYTHING son. That's how you determine the truth..

Anyone who presents data which is wrong must be shown for what they are.

However what we have here is a guy who is basically willing to ignore good data when it doesn't suit him, and then when something that supports his theory, he'll go tell everyone how right he is and look, all the evidence (he chooses to accept) proves he is right.

This sort of mentality is just ridiculous.

I was talking about the data that was omitted from the NOAA article because it would have been embarrassing.
If you focus on personalities --- you'll never see why the science ain't even close to settled.

I understand what you were talking about, it just happens to not be what I'm talking about. No, science isn't settled, but just playing silly beggars isn't going to help either, and that's what we're getting.

 

[skookerasbil]

So much evidence the past few years of the NOAA and NASA rigging the data and it moves none of the entrenched religion, which I guess sorta says something about religion, huh?!!

Thankfully for the rest of us, the public isn't impressed with the "science" which is all I care about. Look at this election cycle.......NOBODY is talking about climate change except the fringe k00ks and nobody is listening to them. Fossil fuels will dominate for decades from now by every single projection including Obama's EIA report...........

Whos not winning?

 

[mamooth]

The current radiosonde data is in EXCELLENT agreement with the current era satellite data.

In agreement with the corrected RSS, yes. However, the actual radiosande data contradicts the bad UAH data that deniers now rely on exclusively, and agrees very closely with the surface data.

The specific denier fraud technique used here is to cherrypick old data with known severe calibration defects. When a group deliberately ignores the good data and substitutes known bad data instead, that's a sure sign you're looking at pseudoscience.

 

[flacaltenn]

The current radiosonde data is in EXCELLENT agreement with the current era satellite data.

In agreement with the corrected RSS, yes. However, the actual radiosande data contradicts the bad UAH data that deniers now rely on exclusively, and agrees very closely with the surface data.

The specific denier fraud technique used here is to cherrypick old data with known severe calibration defects. When a group deliberately ignores the good data and substitutes known bad data instead, that's a sure sign you're looking at pseudoscience.

That's only because NOAA has started to muck with the 21st century balloon data. They've adjusted that period to MATCH their other fairytale results.. They neglected to adjust the older data.

The more accurate estimate of global warming is NOT at 3 feet above the surface. It's a better estimate taken as an average of the lower troposphere..

 

[RollingThunder]

More bad news for the AGW k00ks.........evidently, the NOAA has been hiding 21 years on their graphs!!!

toiletpaper://realclimatescience.com/2016/03/noaa-radiosonde-data-shows-no-warming-for-58-years/']NOAA Radiosonde Data Shows No Warming For 58 Years | Real Science

More deranged drivel and fraudulent bullshit from another astroturfed denier cult blog, this one run by a stooge for the fossil fuel industry who uses a phony made-up name - Steven Goddard - aka Tony Heller.

Which the troll Kookles is gullible enough to fucking swallow.

 

[skookerasbil]

58 years s0ns!!!!!

And people wonder why fossil fuels are dominating and will continue to dominate well out past 2050!!!

Who's not winning????

 

[RollingThunder]

58 years

LOLOLOLOL.....sooooo insane!

The actual temperature trend.....

Recent surface temperature in different temporal resolution. PDF (Data through January 2016 used. Now with GHCN V3.3.0 and ERSST v4. Last modified: 2016/02/12. (source)

 

[skookerasbil]

More bad news for the AGW k00ks.........evidently, the NOAA has been hiding 21 years on their graphs!!!

toiletpaper://realclimatescience.com/2016/03/noaa-radiosonde-data-shows-no-warming-for-58-years/']NOAA Radiosonde Data Shows No Warming For 58 Years | Real Science

More deranged drivel and fraudulent bullshit from another astroturfed denier cult blog, this one run by a stooge for the fossil fuel industry who uses a phony made-up name - Steven Goddard - aka Tony Heller.

Which the troll Kookles is gullible enough to fucking swallow.

Not real frustrated with the "consensus" data having no impact in the real world are ya s0n??

God I so love making the k00ks heads explode in here!!!



[URL=http://s42.photobucket.com/user/baldaltima/media/exploding-head.jpg.html][/URL]