Pacific Ocean responsible for global warming slowdown

[skookerasbil]

So.....how many excuses for the pause are we up to now gentlemen?? Of course, we knew they'd get around to blaming an ocean or two sooner or later!!

 

[skookerasbil]

Not too much to be perfectly honest. Man contributes less than 5% of the total global CO2 content. The absurd fallacy that that is the camel that broke the straws back (yes, I know...it's a joke) has now been shown to be an absolute crock.

Contributed 5%? CO2 concentrations before the industrial revolution was 280ppm. Now it hovers around 400ppm, mostly, if not entirely, from human-derived sources. That is considerably more than 5%.

I think they call that bullshit

Prove it.

You prove it for him everytime you post one of your silly links. Put another way, you claimed that CO2 adjusted the knob. Now, after 18 years of ever rising CO2 levels and static global temps it is now known beyond doubt that that is not true.

Wishful thinking. 14 of the last 15 years have seen record high global temperatures. Global warming has not gone away. Variations in weather patterns is not evidence that it isn't occurring because it most certainly is. Now, if he won't prove his claim, why don't you take a stab at it? Good luck with that.

Oooooooops..........fAiL analysis............ the onus is 100% on you knuckleheads to prove your case in 2015 s0n........skeptics don't have to prove dick. The Pew, Gallup and Rasmussen polls are crystal clear: Nobody is caring about the science you bozo's cite and its not even debatable. Luck has nothing to do with it.......when you rig the science data for years, people kinda catch on s0n!!!

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Discuss amongst yourselves:

Pacific Ocean heat sink cause for warming slowdown - UPI.com

LOLZ

The ocean ate my Globull Warmingz

LOLz

You fucking morons shouldn't get another single fucking cent of taxpayer money, go get Soros to pay for your fucking nonesnse

 

[CrusaderFrank]

ZOMGGGGGGGGGGGGG Can you imagine how high these record high temperatures would be during the Pause (no warming past 18 years) if the Ocean didn't eat the Global Warming?

They'd be super record highs!! Maybe Super Duper records!

 

[Old Rocks]

Jan16, going to remind you silly asses about these posts.

 

[orogenicman]

I didn't have to because we weren't talking about that. But since you brought it up, what, exactly, if anything, do you believe that pumping 30+ billion tons of ghgs each year into the atmosphere does to the global climate system? Anything at all? Do you believe it is somehow inert despite all the evidence to the contrary?

Not too much to be perfectly honest. Man contributes less than 5% of the total global CO2 content. The absurd fallacy that that is the camel that broke the straws back (yes, I know...it's a joke) has now been shown to be an absolute crock.

Contributed 5%? CO2 concentrations before the industrial revolution was 280ppm. Now it hovers around 400ppm, mostly, if not entirely, from human-derived sources. That is considerably more than 5%.

I think they call that bullshit

Prove it.

hahahahahahahaahaha, what a tool, make sure you wipe after the enema.

Right, you can't prove it. You're talking outta yer arse. But we knew that already.

 

[orogenicman]

I didn't have to because we weren't talking about that. But since you brought it up, what, exactly, if anything, do you believe that pumping 30+ billion tons of ghgs each year into the atmosphere does to the global climate system? Anything at all? Do you believe it is somehow inert despite all the evidence to the contrary?

Not too much to be perfectly honest. Man contributes less than 5% of the total global CO2 content. The absurd fallacy that that is the camel that broke the straws back (yes, I know...it's a joke) has now been shown to be an absolute crock.

Contributed 5%? CO2 concentrations before the industrial revolution was 280ppm. Now it hovers around 400ppm, mostly, if not entirely, from human-derived sources. That is considerably more than 5%.

I think they call that bullshit

Prove it.

BTW, I heard you have a flower out your ear. No need to prove it, I'll just tell everyone you do. How's that? Look at orangeman's flower. Is it tulip or tissue? I know it ain't a rose, but nice coloring.

So instead of being a man and proving your claim, you'll be violating the rules and harassing me. So not only are you a troll, you are a stalker. I mean, really. You posted 11 unanswered responses to my posts in less than 45 minutes, none of them relevant to the OP. All of them aimed at me personally. Nothing better to do, huh? Oh dear.

 

[westwall]

Not too much to be perfectly honest. Man contributes less than 5% of the total global CO2 content. The absurd fallacy that that is the camel that broke the straws back (yes, I know...it's a joke) has now been shown to be an absolute crock.

Contributed 5%? CO2 concentrations before the industrial revolution was 280ppm. Now it hovers around 400ppm, mostly, if not entirely, from human-derived sources. That is considerably more than 5%.

I think they call that bullshit

Prove it.

You prove it for him everytime you post one of your silly links. Put another way, you claimed that CO2 adjusted the knob. Now, after 18 years of ever rising CO2 levels and static global temps it is now known beyond doubt that that is not true.

Wishful thinking. 14 of the last 15 years have seen record high global temperatures. Global warming has not gone away. Variations in weather patterns is not evidence that it isn't occurring because it most certainly is. Now, if he won't prove his claim, why don't you take a stab at it? Good luck with that.

Sure they have. .01 degree C with error bars of .1 C and you think that actually means something. As usual you have nothing but the ever popular appeal to authority and slamming your hands over your ears to block out anything factual actually entering your skull. Feel free to explain to the class how you can make a claim for temperature when the error bars are ten times greater than the supposedly measured temp increase.

I'll wait and be sure to show the math.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Jan16, going to remind you silly asses about these posts.

What the fuck are you babbling about now

 

[orogenicman]

Contributed 5%? CO2 concentrations before the industrial revolution was 280ppm. Now it hovers around 400ppm, mostly, if not entirely, from human-derived sources. That is considerably more than 5%.

I think they call that bullshit

Prove it.

You prove it for him everytime you post one of your silly links. Put another way, you claimed that CO2 adjusted the knob. Now, after 18 years of ever rising CO2 levels and static global temps it is now known beyond doubt that that is not true.

Wishful thinking. 14 of the last 15 years have seen record high global temperatures. Global warming has not gone away. Variations in weather patterns is not evidence that it isn't occurring because it most certainly is. Now, if he won't prove his claim, why don't you take a stab at it? Good luck with that.

Sure they have. .01 degree C with error bars of .1 C and you think that actually means something. As usual you have nothing but the ever popular appeal to authority and slamming your hands over your ears to block out anything factual actually entering your skull. Feel free to explain to the class how you can make a claim for temperature when the error bars are ten times greater than the supposedly measured temp increase.

I'll wait and be sure to show the math.

Gee, another diversion so you don't have to prove a claim. Try again. This time, prove the claim.

 

[IanC]

Jan16, going to remind you silly asses about these posts.

What the fuck are you babbling about now

That's when he figures the new record for warmest year evah will be announced. Every year is the warmest ever but somehow the Pause continues. Postnormal math and science. Only the clerics can understand the intricacies involved.

 

[orogenicman]

Jan16, going to remind you silly asses about these posts.

What the fuck are you babbling about now

That's when he figures the new record for warmest year evah will be announced. Every year is the warmest ever but somehow the Pause continues. Postnormal math and science. Only the clerics can understand the intricacies involved.

Gee, you call scientists "clerics", a creationist tactic. How original. You know, I don't see you complaining that only brain surgeons understand the intricacies of brain surgery. But I guess in your small mind, they are clerics too, eh?

 

[IanC]

Jan16, going to remind you silly asses about these posts.

What the fuck are you babbling about now

That's when he figures the new record for warmest year evah will be announced. Every year is the warmest ever but somehow the Pause continues. Postnormal math and science. Only the clerics can understand the intricacies involved.

Gee, you call scientists "clerics", a creationist tactic. How original. You know, I don't see you complaining that only brain surgeons understand the intricacies of brain surgery. But I guess in your small mind, they are clerics too, eh?

Brain surgeons don't make the tools they use, or even understand the methods of making them.

Climate scientists have been under a constant barrage of criticism over their mistaken use of statistical methods unfit for the purpose.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Jan16, going to remind you silly asses about these posts.

What the fuck are you babbling about now

That's when he figures the new record for warmest year evah will be announced. Every year is the warmest ever but somehow the Pause continues. Postnormal math and science. Only the clerics can understand the intricacies involved.

Well if you take the Pause and add in the Warming devoured by the deep Pacific Ocean (we're unclear on the mechanism by which atmospheric CO2 heat the ocean 700m deep, but since when has that ever mattered) and square it, then you get the WARMEREST APRIL EVAH!!!!!!!

 

[westwall]

I think they call that bullshit

Prove it.

You prove it for him everytime you post one of your silly links. Put another way, you claimed that CO2 adjusted the knob. Now, after 18 years of ever rising CO2 levels and static global temps it is now known beyond doubt that that is not true.

Wishful thinking. 14 of the last 15 years have seen record high global temperatures. Global warming has not gone away. Variations in weather patterns is not evidence that it isn't occurring because it most certainly is. Now, if he won't prove his claim, why don't you take a stab at it? Good luck with that.

Sure they have. .01 degree C with error bars of .1 C and you think that actually means something. As usual you have nothing but the ever popular appeal to authority and slamming your hands over your ears to block out anything factual actually entering your skull. Feel free to explain to the class how you can make a claim for temperature when the error bars are ten times greater than the supposedly measured temp increase.

I'll wait and be sure to show the math.

Gee, another diversion so you don't have to prove a claim. Try again. This time, prove the claim.

"Diversion"? So you really don't have a clue what they are saying. Guess that puts paid your claim to an education.

 

[orogenicman]

B

Jan16, going to remind you silly asses about these posts.

What the fuck are you babbling about now

That's when he figures the new record for warmest year evah will be announced. Every year is the warmest ever but somehow the Pause continues. Postnormal math and science. Only the clerics can understand the intricacies involved.

Gee, you call scientists "clerics", a creationist tactic. How original. You know, I don't see you complaining that only brain surgeons understand the intricacies of brain surgery. But I guess in your small mind, they are clerics too, eh?

Brain surgeons don't make the tools they use, or even understand the methods of making them.

Are you sure about that? Because I know a couple of brain surgeons who would disagree with that claim.

Climate scientists have been under a constant barrage of criticism over their mistaken use of statistical methods unfit for the purpose.

And yet I have seen only ONE published paper that makes this claim, written years ago by creationist McIntyre, a paper that was shown to make not one bit of difference in the result about which he was complaining.

 

[IanC]

B

Jan16, going to remind you silly asses about these posts.

What the fuck are you babbling about now

That's when he figures the new record for warmest year evah will be announced. Every year is the warmest ever but somehow the Pause continues. Postnormal math and science. Only the clerics can understand the intricacies involved.

Gee, you call scientists "clerics", a creationist tactic. How original. You know, I don't see you complaining that only brain surgeons understand the intricacies of brain surgery. But I guess in your small mind, they are clerics too, eh?

Brain surgeons don't make the tools they use, or even understand the methods of making them.

Are you sure about that? Because I know a couple of brain surgeons who would disagree with that claim.

Climate scientists have been under a constant barrage of criticism over their mistaken use of statistical methods unfit for the purpose.

And yet I have seen only ONE published paper that makes this claim, written years ago by creationist McIntyre, a paper that was shown to make not one bit of difference in the result about which he was complaining.

when was the last time a brain surgeon made his own scalpels, ground the lenses for his eyewear, made his own MRI machine, developed and produced his own drugs, etc?

O - you seem very unknowledgeable about statistical criticisms. why was Gergis withdrawn? Steig, Kaufmann, Marcott, etc, etc. but especially Mann. do you honestly believe what you said? or are you just repeating someone else's talking point that has no comparison to reality? you need to read more than Real Climate and SkepticalScience.

 

[orogenicman]

Prove it.

You prove it for him everytime you post one of your silly links. Put another way, you claimed that CO2 adjusted the knob. Now, after 18 years of ever rising CO2 levels and static global temps it is now known beyond doubt that that is not true.

Wishful thinking. 14 of the last 15 years have seen record high global temperatures. Global warming has not gone away. Variations in weather patterns is not evidence that it isn't occurring because it most certainly is. Now, if he won't prove his claim, why don't you take a stab at it? Good luck with that.

Sure they have. .01 degree C with error bars of .1 C and you think that actually means something. As usual you have nothing but the ever popular appeal to authority and slamming your hands over your ears to block out anything factual actually entering your skull. Feel free to explain to the class how you can make a claim for temperature when the error bars are ten times greater than the supposedly measured temp increase.

I'll wait and be sure to show the math.

Gee, another diversion so you don't have to prove a claim. Try again. This time, prove the claim.

"Diversion"? So you really don't have a clue what they are saying. Guess that puts paid your claim to an education.

Yes diversion. You really don't know what I said, do you? Then don't get involved in someone else's conversation. you noticed that he never did back up his claim. You didn't notice? Huh.

 

[orogenicman]

B

What the fuck are you babbling about now

That's when he figures the new record for warmest year evah will be announced. Every year is the warmest ever but somehow the Pause continues. Postnormal math and science. Only the clerics can understand the intricacies involved.

Gee, you call scientists "clerics", a creationist tactic. How original. You know, I don't see you complaining that only brain surgeons understand the intricacies of brain surgery. But I guess in your small mind, they are clerics too, eh?

Brain surgeons don't make the tools they use, or even understand the methods of making them.

Are you sure about that? Because I know a couple of brain surgeons who would disagree with that claim.

Climate scientists have been under a constant barrage of criticism over their mistaken use of statistical methods unfit for the purpose.

And yet I have seen only ONE published paper that makes this claim, written years ago by creationist McIntyre, a paper that was shown to make not one bit of difference in the result about which he was complaining.

when was the last time a brain surgeon made his own scalpels, ground the lenses for his eyewear, made his own MRI machine, developed and produced his own drugs, etc?

Brain surgeons rarely use scapels these days, Ian. This isn't the 19th century, dude. And yes, they design many of their tools these days. Why? Because they are the only ones with the necessary knowledge to know what they friggin need.

O - you seem very unknowledgeable about statistical criticisms. why was Gergis withdrawn? Steig, Kaufmann, Marcott, etc, etc. but especially Mann. do you honestly believe what you said? or are you just repeating someone else's talking point that has no comparison to reality? you need to read more than Real Climate and SkepticalScience.

I don't tend to read those web sites. In case you weren't aware, there are scientific periodicals that contain the actual scientific papers. But I do keep up with current events. So a couple of papers get revised. So what? Name a profession where this never occurs. Better yet. Name one that got revised due to the peer reviewed work of one of your denier buddies.

 

[IanC]

B

That's when he figures the new record for warmest year evah will be announced. Every year is the warmest ever but somehow the Pause continues. Postnormal math and science. Only the clerics can understand the intricacies involved.

Gee, you call scientists "clerics", a creationist tactic. How original. You know, I don't see you complaining that only brain surgeons understand the intricacies of brain surgery. But I guess in your small mind, they are clerics too, eh?

Brain surgeons don't make the tools they use, or even understand the methods of making them.

Are you sure about that? Because I know a couple of brain surgeons who would disagree with that claim.

Climate scientists have been under a constant barrage of criticism over their mistaken use of statistical methods unfit for the purpose.

And yet I have seen only ONE published paper that makes this claim, written years ago by creationist McIntyre, a paper that was shown to make not one bit of difference in the result about which he was complaining.

when was the last time a brain surgeon made his own scalpels, ground the lenses for his eyewear, made his own MRI machine, developed and produced his own drugs, etc?

Brain surgeons rarely use scapels these days, Ian. This isn't the 19th century, dude. And yes, they design many of their tools these days. Why? Because they are the only ones with the necessary knowledge to know what they friggin need.

O - you seem very unknowledgeable about statistical criticisms. why was Gergis withdrawn? Steig, Kaufmann, Marcott, etc, etc. but especially Mann. do you honestly believe what you said? or are you just repeating someone else's talking point that has no comparison to reality? you need to read more than Real Climate and SkepticalScience.

I don't tend to read those web sites. In case you weren't aware, there are scientific periodicals that contain the actual scientific papers. But I do keep up with current events. So a couple of papers get revised. So what? Name a profession where this never occurs. Better yet. Name one that got revised due to the peer reviewed work of one of your denier buddies.

Okay. Which periodicals or journals do you subscribe to? It should be easy enough to verify your access to sequestered information.