Pay No AttentionTo These Reports.....

[the_human_being]

Yep. We're all doomed --AGAIN>

 

[Missourian]

Just that Right Wingers are dumber than a whale turd.....nothing new!

Well, it just doesn't seem to have worked out that way...

 

[SuperDemocrat]

......it's just left wing propaganda:

Tornadoes tear through Texas, killing at least 8 people - NY ...

Eight dead after tornado, storms hit Texas - USA Today

Christmas storms rips through South, killing 6

At least 14 killed after strong storms, tornadoes sweep ...

At Least 1 Dead as Tornadoes Move Through North Texas ...

and if you think that's something wait till January.

I blame Obama...

 

[Campbell]

......it's just left wing propaganda:

Tornadoes tear through Texas, killing at least 8 people - NY ...

Eight dead after tornado, storms hit Texas - USA Today

Christmas storms rips through South, killing 6

At least 14 killed after strong storms, tornadoes sweep ...

At Least 1 Dead as Tornadoes Move Through North Texas ...

and if you think that's something wait till January.

I blame Obama...

I blame the warmongering, tax cutting, debt building Bush

 

[The Rabbi]

......it's just left wing propaganda:

Tornadoes tear through Texas, killing at least 8 people - NY ...

Eight dead after tornado, storms hit Texas - USA Today

Christmas storms rips through South, killing 6

At least 14 killed after strong storms, tornadoes sweep ...

At Least 1 Dead as Tornadoes Move Through North Texas ...

and if you think that's something wait till January.

I blame Obama...

I blame the warmongering, tax cutting, debt building Bush

You blame Bush for the clap you got from some Knoxville whore. Your opinion isnt especially valued because you post stupid shit, usually blaming Bush.

 

[OKTexas]

First tornado I actually witnessed on the ground was on the 5th of Dec. 1976. This is nothing unusual for El Nino years. I also would ask why this is in politics?

 

[Billy_Bob]

......it's just left wing propaganda:

Tornadoes tear through Texas, killing at least 8 people - NY ...

Eight dead after tornado, storms hit Texas - USA Today

Christmas storms rips through South, killing 6

At least 14 killed after strong storms, tornadoes sweep ...

At Least 1 Dead as Tornadoes Move Through North Texas ...

and if you think that's something wait till January.

Tell me, Should i ignore that these things happen about once every 15 years or so? Should I also ignore the fact that historical records show this happening cyclically as long as man has kept records? OR is it i should ignore these because you want me to believe man is causing these things?

 

[Crick]

OR is it i should ignore these because you want me to believe man is causing these things?

This sounds suspiciously as if you are rejecting it not on cause but because you don't believe man could be responsible for such a thing.

 

[Billy_Bob]

OR is it i should ignore these because you want me to believe man is causing these things?

This sounds suspiciously as if you are rejecting it not on cause but because you don't believe man could be responsible for such a thing.

First and foremost, you have no proof that anything is caused by man. Your models fail with 100% certainty showing us that those you worship dont have a dam clue about the physics or workings of our atmosphere. Rather than learn about it they CHANGE DATA to fit their "expectations" rather than act like scientists.

Man hasn't caused any of the current warming and he won't be responsible for the cooling that is coming fast either.

 

[Crick]

Climate science models do NOT fail. Yours do (no model has ever hindcast the 20th century without AGW). You have repeatedly now demonstrated a less than average grasp of many of the basic principles of physics as well as the principles that would keep someone from lying about their own qualifications, so your condemnation of the work of published PhDs just doesn't mean much Billy Boy.

Cooling coming fast? Looks like another one for the Rash Statement Log.

 

[westwall]

Climate science models do NOT fail. Yours do (no model has ever hindcast the 20th century without AGW). You have repeatedly now demonstrated a less than average grasp of many of the basic principles of physics as well as the principles that would keep someone from lying about their own qualifications, so your condemnation of the work of published PhDs just doesn't mean much Billy Boy.

Cooling coming fast? Looks like another one for the Rash Statement Log.

What is the definition of never being correct? Failing? Deficient? Futile? Fruitless? Ineffective? Useless? (my personal favorite), Defective? Give us a word that you like. All of these apply so take your pick. The one word that does not apply is accurate.

 

[Crick]

Climate science models do NOT fail. Yours do (no model has ever hindcast the 20th century without AGW). You have repeatedly now demonstrated a less than average grasp of many of the basic principles of physics as well as the principles that would keep someone from lying about their own qualifications, so your condemnation of the work of published PhDs just doesn't mean much Billy Boy.

Cooling coming fast? Looks like another one for the Rash Statement Log.

What is the definition of never being correct? Failing? Deficient? Futile? Fruitless? Ineffective? Useless? (my personal favorite), Defective? Give us a word that you like. All of these apply so take your pick. The one word that does not apply is accurate.

When will you learn that simply saying it doesn't make it so. And when the only thing you base your faulty conclusions on has been clearly demonstrated faulty, you look more than a bit the fool hanging with it.

If anyone is paying attention, they might notice that these are completely different comparison data than the two prior posts I have put up (which were themselves essentially unique) showing precisely these results: that current GCM are capable of accurate hindcasting and that the constant denier ululation of universal GCM failure is a blatant lie.

 

[Old Rocks]

Mr. Westwall,and Silly Billy. That is that definition. Both predicting imminent cooling that never comes. Mr. Westwall, you have been predicting cooling ever since you first came on this board. So what the hell happened? Silly Billy, how well that name fits. You cannot even read a graph., You posted Esterbrooke's nonsense, which showed a cooling from 2010 until now, with 2015 being at 0.5. However, 2015 is going to be at about 0.8. Why on earth would you post something so obviously wrong?

 

[Crick]

Mr. Westwall,and Silly Billy. That is that definition. Both predicting imminent cooling that never comes. Mr. Westwall, you have been predicting cooling ever since you first came on this board. So what the hell happened? Silly Billy, how well that name fits. You cannot even read a graph., You posted Esterbrooke's nonsense, which showed a cooling from 2010 until now, with 2015 being at 0.5. However, 2015 is going to be at about 0.8. Why on earth would you post something so obviously wrong?

He does that because when the only tool you posses is a Nerf Gun, all your problems start to look like other three year olds

 

[Billy_Bob]

Climate science models do NOT fail. Yours do (no model has ever hindcast the 20th century without AGW). You have repeatedly now demonstrated a less than average grasp of many of the basic principles of physics as well as the principles that would keep someone from lying about their own qualifications, so your condemnation of the work of published PhDs just doesn't mean much Billy Boy.

Cooling coming fast? Looks like another one for the Rash Statement Log.

What is the definition of never being correct? Failing? Deficient? Futile? Fruitless? Ineffective? Useless? (my personal favorite), Defective? Give us a word that you like. All of these apply so take your pick. The one word that does not apply is accurate.

When will you learn that simply saying it doesn't make it so. And when the only thing you base your faulty conclusions on has been clearly demonstrated faulty, you look more than a bit the fool hanging with it.

If anyone is paying attention, they might notice that these are completely different comparison data than the two prior posts I have put up (which were themselves essentially unique) showing precisely these results: that current GCM are capable of accurate hindcasting and that the constant denier ululation of universal GCM failure is a blatant lie.

Even AR4 admits defeat you SKS lying piece of shit.


By the way, the grey shaded area was added in the final and is OUTSIDE OF THE ERROR BANDS.. It was added to deceive those who know what science is.

What a lying sack of excrement you are.

 

[jc456]

......it's just left wing propaganda:

Tornadoes tear through Texas, killing at least 8 people - NY ...

Eight dead after tornado, storms hit Texas - USA Today

Christmas storms rips through South, killing 6

At least 14 killed after strong storms, tornadoes sweep ...

At Least 1 Dead as Tornadoes Move Through North Texas ...

and if you think that's something wait till January.

yah, pay no attention to historical weather events and live on today's right?

1953 Vicksburg, Mississippi tornadoes - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

!953, before you most likely born, read it:

excerpt:
The 1953 Vicksburg, Mississippi tornadoes were a deadly severe weather event that affected northeastern Louisiana, southeastern Arkansas, and western Mississippi on December 5, 1953. At least four confirmed tornadoes touched down; one of the tornadoes produced F5 damage on the Fujita scale as it moved through the city of Vicksburg, causing 38 deaths in the area. It remains the fourth-deadliest tornado to affect the U.S. state of Mississippi, behind the 1840 Natchez tornado, the 1936 Tupelo, Mississippi, tornado, and the March 3, 1966, tornado in Jackson, Mississippi. It is one of just four F5 tornadoes recorded in Mississippi since 1950.

 

[jc456]

......it's just left wing propaganda:

Tornadoes tear through Texas, killing at least 8 people - NY ...

Eight dead after tornado, storms hit Texas - USA Today

Christmas storms rips through South, killing 6

At least 14 killed after strong storms, tornadoes sweep ...

At Least 1 Dead as Tornadoes Move Through North Texas ...

and if you think that's something wait till January.

You know what I heard? I heard it's supposed to get dark tonight too. What do you make of that???

sounds scary

 

[Crick]

Your graphic did not come from AR4. It came from the leaked draft of AR5 and was not included in the final version.

If you want to see model performance as shown in AR5, you need to look at graphics like this:

Here is an analysis from Grant Foster (aka Tamino) of your graphic:
******************************************************************************************************************************
What about the plot from the draft of the AR5 report? It compares projections based on multi-model averages from FAR (first assessment report), SAR (second assessment report), TAR (third assessment report) and AR4 (fourth assessment report) to observations (annual averages) from NASA GISS, HadCRUT4, and NCDC. In my opinion, there is a flaw in how the comparison is done. I don’t suspect it’s an intentional mistake, but I do believe it’s a mistake.

The flaw is this: all the series (both projections and observations) are aligned at 1990. But observations include random year-to-year fluctuations, whereas the projections do not because the average of multiple models averages those out. Using a single-year baseline (1990) offsets all subsequent years by the fluctuation of that baseline year. Instead, the projections should be aligned to the value due to the existing trend in observations at 1990.

Aligning the projections with a single extra-hot year makes the projections seem too hot, so observations are too cool by comparison. This is indeed a mistake — it would be just as much a mistake to align the projections with a single extra-cool year (like 1992), which would make the projections too cool and observations too hot by comparison.

We can estimate the observational fluctuation that by fitting a smoothed curve to the observed data to estimate a nonlinear trend, and noting the difference between the 1990 value and the smoothed value. Doing so indicates that GISS and HadCRUT4 are both about 0.12 deg.C hotter than the existing trend, while NCDC is about 0.10 deg.C hotter.

Fortunately, the draft version of the AR5 report gives the actual data used to plot the projections for FAR, SAR, and TAR (but not for AR4). So, we can make our own version of the comparison. Here’s the comparison as presently done in the report, with all observed series aligned to projections in 1990:



What should be done is to offset the observations so that the hotter-than-average 1990 really is hotter than average. When I offset the observations by 0.1 deg.C, we get more realistic comparison of observations to projections:



It turns out that observed global temperature has gone “right down the middle” of the IPCC projections. But, fake skeptics want you to believe otherwise. That’s what fake skeptics do.
****************************************************************

 

[Campbell]

......it's just left wing propaganda:

Tornadoes tear through Texas, killing at least 8 people - NY ...

Eight dead after tornado, storms hit Texas - USA Today

Christmas storms rips through South, killing 6

At least 14 killed after strong storms, tornadoes sweep ...

At Least 1 Dead as Tornadoes Move Through North Texas ...

and if you think that's something wait till January.

yah, pay no attention to historical weather events and live on today's right?

1953 Vicksburg, Mississippi tornadoes - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

!953, before you most likely born, read it:

excerpt:
The 1953 Vicksburg, Mississippi tornadoes were a deadly severe weather event that affected northeastern Louisiana, southeastern Arkansas, and western Mississippi on December 5, 1953. At least four confirmed tornadoes touched down; one of the tornadoes produced F5 damage on the Fujita scale as it moved through the city of Vicksburg, causing 38 deaths in the area. It remains the fourth-deadliest tornado to affect the U.S. state of Mississippi, behind the 1840 Natchez tornado, the 1936 Tupelo, Mississippi, tornado, and the March 3, 1966, tornado in Jackson, Mississippi. It is one of just four F5 tornadoes recorded in Mississippi since 1950.

I graduated from high school in 1952.

If there are still people among us who do not recognize the new turn which involves severe weather events it's mainly because they choose not to do so. Warmer temperatures, more precipitation, more wildfires in the west, more frequent storms at weird and unusual times, etc. It's fact not fiction:

"When Hurricane Sandy struck the Northeast in 2012, Bloomberg Businessweek didn’t mince words."

“It’s global warming, stupid,” the magazine boldly declared.

 

[jc456]

......it's just left wing propaganda:

Tornadoes tear through Texas, killing at least 8 people - NY ...

Eight dead after tornado, storms hit Texas - USA Today

Christmas storms rips through South, killing 6

At least 14 killed after strong storms, tornadoes sweep ...

At Least 1 Dead as Tornadoes Move Through North Texas ...

and if you think that's something wait till January.

yah, pay no attention to historical weather events and live on today's right?

1953 Vicksburg, Mississippi tornadoes - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

!953, before you most likely born, read it:

excerpt:
The 1953 Vicksburg, Mississippi tornadoes were a deadly severe weather event that affected northeastern Louisiana, southeastern Arkansas, and western Mississippi on December 5, 1953. At least four confirmed tornadoes touched down; one of the tornadoes produced F5 damage on the Fujita scale as it moved through the city of Vicksburg, causing 38 deaths in the area. It remains the fourth-deadliest tornado to affect the U.S. state of Mississippi, behind the 1840 Natchez tornado, the 1936 Tupelo, Mississippi, tornado, and the March 3, 1966, tornado in Jackson, Mississippi. It is one of just four F5 tornadoes recorded in Mississippi since 1950.

I graduated from high school in 1952.

If there are still people among us who do not recognize the new turn which involves severe weather events it's mainly because they choose not to do so. Warmer temperatures, more precipitation, more wildfires in the west, more frequent storms at weird and unusual times, etc. It's fact not fiction.

so what is it you remember about that 1953 event or the 1840 one? Is not severe weather severe weather, or do you only get to decide what is severe? Just curious how you get there.