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.
You would never know the truth, or admit to the truth even if it had bitch slapped you in the face, as has been proven all through this thread, sonny. Now, back to your sandbox.
And you have not addressed ANYTHING in the OP. All you've done here is deflect attention from it.
I repeat if we only have 6 years of recorded data how can ANYONE make a claim about 60 years much less thousands? The reason the global warming is biting the believers in the ass is they panicked over 15 years data and then when the next 15 years had no warming they piled lie on top of lie to protect themselves.
And you have not addressed ANYTHING in the OP. All you've done here is deflect attention from it.
I repeat if we only have 6 years of recorded data how can ANYONE make a claim about 60 years much less thousands? The reason the global warming is biting the believers in the ass is they panicked over 15 years data and then when the next 15 years had no warming they piled lie on top of lie to protect themselves.
Apparently you don't understand that AGW does not depend on any data. It's a given consequence of increasing atmospheric GHG concentrations. Which are a given consequence of fossil fuel burning.
So the question is not if it is happening. The question is given the dynamics of more energy here on earth, when will higher climactic temperatures restore energy balance?
You would never know the truth, or admit to the truth even if it had bitch slapped you in the face, as has been proven all through this thread, sonny. Now, back to your sandbox.
And you have not addressed ANYTHING in the OP. All you've done here is deflect attention from it.
I repeat if we only have 6 years of recorded data how can ANYONE make a claim about 60 years much less thousands? The reason the global warming is biting the believers in the ass is they panicked over 15 years data and then when the next 15 years had no warming they piled lie on top of lie to protect themselves.
And you have not addressed ANYTHING in the OP. All you've done here is deflect attention from it.
I repeat if we only have 6 years of recorded data how can ANYONE make a claim about 60 years much less thousands? The reason the global warming is biting the believers in the ass is they panicked over 15 years data and then when the next 15 years had no warming they piled lie on top of lie to protect themselves.
Erm, you left out a decimal place. 60 years, not 6 years, as in "Pacific Ocean waters absorbing heat 15 times faster over past 60 years than in past 10,000 years". You do recall the OP, right?
I repeat if we only have 6 years of recorded data how can ANYONE make a claim about 60 years much less thousands? The reason the global warming is biting the believers in the ass is they panicked over 15 years data and then when the next 15 years had no warming they piled lie on top of lie to protect themselves.
Erm, you left out a decimal place. 60 years, not 6 years, as in "Pacific Ocean waters absorbing heat 15 times faster over past 60 years than in past 10,000 years". You do recall the OP, right?
We do NOT have 60 years of data. The devises to measure deep are brand new no one measured the depths of the ocean for 60 years.
In its latest report, released in September, the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) noted the recent slowdown in the rate of global warming. While global temperatures rose by about one-fifth of a degree Fahrenheit per decade from the 1950s through 1990s, warming slowed to just half that rate after the record hot year of 1998. The IPCC has attributed the pause to natural climate fluctuations caused by volcanic eruptions, changes in solar intensity, and the movement of heat through the ocean. Many scientists note that 1998 was an exceptionally hot year even by modern standards, and so any average rise using it as a starting point would downplay the longer-term warming trend.
Ocean heat is typically measured from buoys dispersed throughout the ocean, and with instruments lowered from ships, with reliable records at least in some places going back to the 1960s. To look back farther in time, scientists have developed ways to analyze the chemistry of ancient marine life to reconstruct the climates in which they lived. In a 2003 expedition to Indonesia, the researchers collected cores of sediment from the seas where water from the Pacific flows into the Indian Ocean. By measuring the levels of magnesium to calcium in the shells of Hyalinea balthica, a one-celled organism buried in those sediments, the researchers estimated the temperature of the middle-depth waters where H. Balthica lived, from about 1,500 to 3,000 feet down. The temperature record there reflects middle-depth temperatures throughout the western Pacific, the researchers say, since the waters around Indonesia originate from the mid-depths of the North and South Pacific.
Though the climate of the last 10,000 years has been thought to be relatively stable, the researchers found that the Pacific intermediate depths have generally been cooling during that time, though with various ups and downs. From about 7,000 years ago until the start of the Medieval Warm Period in northern Europe, at about 1100, the water cooled gradually, by almost 1 degree C, or almost 2 degrees F. The rate of cooling then picked up during the so-called Little Ice Age that followed, dropping another 1 degree C, or 2 degrees F, until about 1600. The authors attribute the cooling from 7,000 years ago until the Medieval Warm Period to changes in Earth's orientation toward the sun, which affected how much sunlight fell on both poles. In 1600 or so, temperatures started gradually going back up. Then, over the last 60 years, water column temperatures, averaged from the surface to 2,200 feet, increased 0.18 degrees C, or .32 degrees F. That might seem small in the scheme of things, but it's a rate of warming 15 times faster than at any period in the last 10,000 years, said Linsley.
One explanation for the recent slowdown in global warming is that a prolonged La Niña-like cooling of eastern Pacific surface waters has helped to offset the global rise in temperatures from greenhouse gases. In a study in the journal Nature in August, climate modelers at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography showed that La Niña cooling in the Pacific seemed to suppress global average temperatures during northern hemisphere winters but allowed temperatures to rise during northern hemisphere summers, explaining last year's record U.S. heat wave and the ongoing loss of Arctic sea ice.
When the La Niña cycle switches, and the Pacific reverts to a warmer than usual El Niño phase, global temperatures may likely shoot up again, along with the rate of warming. "With global warming you don't see a gradual warming from one year to the next," said Kevin Trenberth, a climate scientist at the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colo., who was not involved in the research. "It's more like a staircase. You trot along with nothing much happening for 10 years and then suddenly you have a jump and things never go back to the previous level again."
Read more at: Pacific Ocean waters absorbing heat 15 times faster over past 60 years than in past 10,000
The myth that I find most interesting is that all climate scientists are socialist and communists.
Do you suppose that extends to all scientists or just those using the same tools to study climate specifically?
The myth that I find most interesting is that all climate scientists are socialist and communists.
Do you suppose that extends to all scientists or just those using the same tools to study climate specifically?
No, that's the politicians. The climatologists are either lazy or just plain criminals. I'll let you choose which classification applies to you.
The skeptics don't have anything besides the fact that surface temperatures stalled. The oceans make up 80% of our planet and the public is too damn stupid to realize how the climate system works.
I repeat if we only have 6 years of recorded data how can ANYONE make a claim about 60 years much less thousands? The reason the global warming is biting the believers in the ass is they panicked over 15 years data and then when the next 15 years had no warming they piled lie on top of lie to protect themselves.
Apparently you don't understand that AGW does not depend on any data. It's a given consequence of increasing atmospheric GHG concentrations. Which are a given consequence of fossil fuel burning.
So the question is not if it is happening. The question is given the dynamics of more energy here on earth, when will higher climactic temperatures restore energy balance?
Ahh I see so you are free to simply make up any thing you want that furthers your supposed theory. No evidence needed, no data, no facts, no science, just fabricate it from whole cloth and then present it as if it were true.
The skeptics don't have anything besides the fact that surface temperatures stalled. The oceans make up 80% of our planet and the public is too damn stupid to realize how the climate system works.
The skeptics don't have anything besides the fact that surface temperatures stalled. The oceans make up 80% of our planet and the public is too damn stupid to realize how the climate system works.
To cure the Earth we just need to send money to third world nations.....that's the ticket.
Just ask the UN.
The skeptics don't have anything besides the fact that surface temperatures stalled. The oceans make up 80% of our planet and the public is too damn stupid to realize how the climate system works.
To cure the Earth we just need to send money to third world nations.....that's the ticket.
Just ask the UN.
AGW is science. Why do you post exclusively about politics?
To cure the Earth we just need to send money to third world nations.....that's the ticket.
Just ask the UN.
AGW is science. Why do you post exclusively about politics?
Because that is what it has been about along, PMZ. AGW isn't science, it was under the guise of science, but that has been exposed no matter how you and others try and spin it. It has always been political in the sense of redistributing the wealth from one nation to another nation.
I don't usually respond to your nonsense, but this time I did....I'm not going to respond to you again so knock yourself out and go pound sand.
The skeptics don't have anything besides the fact that surface temperatures stalled. The oceans make up 80% of our planet and the public is too damn stupid to realize how the climate system works.
To cure the Earth we just need to send money to third world nations.....that's the ticket.
Just ask the UN.
AGW is science. Why do you post exclusively about politics?
To cure the Earth we just need to send money to third world nations.....that's the ticket.
Just ask the UN.
AGW is science. Why do you post exclusively about politics?
Here's science:
Climate cycles are natural and CO2 lags temp variations. When Earth cools CO2 slowly sinks into oceans. When Earth warms, CO2 is slowly released from oceans. Just like how a warm soda goes flat while a cold one holds carbonation. Just Physics 101 regarding dissolved gases.
These global climate cycles are caused by many natural means. Primarily Sunspot cycles, Earth orbital cycles/variations around the Sun, and even cyclical wobbles in Earth rotation. Wildcards are volcanic eruptions and massive fires. Man cannot alter these cycles in any meaningful way. Our main focus should be on REAL surface air pollution (CO2 is not pollution) and in America we have done a great job on that.
CO2 taxes and fees are just a wealth-redistribution scheme PERIOD.
AGW is science. Why do you post exclusively about politics?
Here's science:
Climate cycles are natural and CO2 lags temp variations. When Earth cools CO2 slowly sinks into oceans. When Earth warms, CO2 is slowly released from oceans. Just like how a warm soda goes flat while a cold one holds carbonation. Just Physics 101 regarding dissolved gases.
These global climate cycles are caused by many natural means. Primarily Sunspot cycles, Earth orbital cycles/variations around the Sun, and even cyclical wobbles in Earth rotation. Wildcards are volcanic eruptions and massive fires. Man cannot alter these cycles in any meaningful way. Our main focus should be on REAL surface air pollution (CO2 is not pollution) and in America we have done a great job on that.
CO2 taxes and fees are just a wealth-redistribution scheme PERIOD.
This Christmas you aren't going to get the truth that you want.
Eighth grade science has some inconvenient truths for you.
AGW is undeniable.
The IPCC is right and Rush Limbaugh is wrong.
The path to inevitable increased surface temperatures has only begun and how it will manifest itself is not predictable.
It will cost us plenty.
Fossil fuels will run out, oil first.
The timing of that is such that we have no time to spare getting prepared. The ever growing demand for ever shrinking supply will escalate the price per gal drastically as the curves cross.
What you, and everyone else, wish the truth was is simply not reality.
Here's science:
Climate cycles are natural and CO2 lags temp variations. When Earth cools CO2 slowly sinks into oceans. When Earth warms, CO2 is slowly released from oceans. Just like how a warm soda goes flat while a cold one holds carbonation. Just Physics 101 regarding dissolved gases.
These global climate cycles are caused by many natural means. Primarily Sunspot cycles, Earth orbital cycles/variations around the Sun, and even cyclical wobbles in Earth rotation. Wildcards are volcanic eruptions and massive fires. Man cannot alter these cycles in any meaningful way. Our main focus should be on REAL surface air pollution (CO2 is not pollution) and in America we have done a great job on that.
CO2 taxes and fees are just a wealth-redistribution scheme PERIOD.
This Christmas you aren't going to get the truth that you want.
Eighth grade science has some inconvenient truths for you.
AGW is undeniable.
The IPCC is right and Rush Limbaugh is wrong.
The path to inevitable increased surface temperatures has only begun and how it will manifest itself is not predictable.
It will cost us plenty.
Fossil fuels will run out, oil first.
The timing of that is such that we have no time to spare getting prepared. The ever growing demand for ever shrinking supply will escalate the price per gal drastically as the curves cross.
What you, and everyone else, wish the truth was is simply not reality.
How do you reconcile Michael Mann's fraudulent and debunked "hockey stick" chart with the ice core data I posted which show natural cycles? Even at the very far right when CO2 is increased during the industrial age, temps flatten out. In fact we're likely on the verge of a long cooling.
Blaming CO2 for global climate cycles is like blaming smoke for fire.
AGW is a cult, a religion, and pure bunk based on faith and lies.
We also have MORE than enough natural gas and oil for the rest of this century and beyond IN AMERICA. I suspect that in several more decades we'll finally find a new way to fuel transportation, but in the mean time we're fine IF we're allowed access to those massive reserves.
BTW, oil and natural gas are about as organic and natural as a fuel can get. As long as it's burned as cleanly as possible, a great and very efficient source of energy!
The skeptics don't have anything besides the fact that surface temperatures stalled. The oceans make up 80% of our planet and the public is too damn stupid to realize how the climate system works.
Sure thing buddy! Let us know when the climatologists figure it out! The evidence shows that they went down the wrong path and are completely wrong with their theory of CO2 being the driver of climate.
