The Global Warmers Have Lost the War

[jc456]

A honest person of normal intelligence would say "the measured temperature increase near the Antarctic is evidence of global warming."

A cult propagandist would say "Don't look at the direct evidence like temperature! Look at the ice! More ice proves temperatures are lower, and the thermometers that say otherwise are in on the conspiracy!".

An honest person of normal intelligence would also admit the models were spot on correct, and that warming has been ongoing without pause for the last 20 years. Cult liars would make it a point to lie big and pretend the opposite.

Again there is more ice as I've already proved to you on another thread so you're still saying warmer air makes ice. Right!!!!!!!

 

[jc456]

No one ever accused the deniers of honesty.

What is a denier? If that's you you're right

 

[jc456]

Thing about this. The earth will shake us humans off like fleas. 99% of all species that ever lived are extinct, fact. Humans found a new way to extinguish ourselves, are we so clever? We need to be a step ahead. Co2 , overpopulation, civil conflict or disease will level us out and we end up with that other 99% of extinct species.

Based on what?

 

[jc456]

Thing about this. The earth will shake us humans off like fleas. 99% of all species that ever lived are extinct, fact. Humans found a new way to extinguish ourselves, are we so clever? We need to be a step ahead. Co2 , overpopulation, civil conflict or disease will level us out and we end up with that other 99% of extinct species.

Curious, do you know what the temperature of earth is supposed to be? Did you get instructions?

 

[Billy_Bob]

The Global Warming Hoax's gold standard has long been the "Hockey stick graph". In Al Gore's Riefenstahlian propaganda film, "an inconvenient truth", the audience audibly gasps!! when the Hockey Stick graph is revealed. It sure looks DRAMATIC!! OMFG!! One can only conclude that (gasp!) Humans are ruining the climate!!! RUN FOR THE HILLS!!...RUN!!! ........ (but only after we advance our political agenda!)

But it turns out that the entire thing was a hoax. Just a "Michael Mann" made fable. There was no hockey stick. The data was fake. The entire statistical foundation upon which the Global warming hoax was built on was nothing but a miasma of lies, deceit, and malfeasance. They lied for $$$ and to advance a political agenda.

Despicable.

What is despicable is that you are one ignorant liar. The Hockey Stick Graph has been confirmed by over a dozen different studies using many different proxies.

What evidence is there for the hockey stick

Of course, these examples only go back around 500 years - this doesn't even cover theMedieval Warm Period. When you combine all the various proxies, including ice cores, coral, lake sediments, glaciers, boreholes & stalagmites, it's possible to reconstruct Northern Hemisphere temperatures without tree-ring proxies going back 1,300 years (Mann 2008). The result is that temperatures in recent decades exceed the maximumproxy estimate (including uncertainty range) for the past 1,300 years. When you include tree-ring data, the same result holds for the past 1,700 years.

Figure 6: Composite Northern Hemisphere land and land plus ocean temperaturereconstructions and estimated 95% confidence intervals. Shown for comparison are published Northern Hemisphere reconstructions (Mann 2008).

Paleoclimatology draws upon a range of proxies and methodologies to calculate past temperatures. This allows independent confirmation of the basic hockey stick result: that the past few decades are the hottest in the past 1,300 years.

The Hockey Stick has been debunked and shown fraud multiple times but you hang on to it like its is a poop flotation device..Even your beloved IPCC has abandoned it and no longer cites it as credible work.. You are such a fool and a tool...

 

[Billy_Bob]

A honest person of normal intelligence would say "the measured temperature increase near the Antarctic is evidence of global warming."

A cult propagandist would say "Don't look at the direct evidence like temperature! Look at the ice! More ice proves temperatures are lower, and the thermometers that say otherwise are in on the conspiracy!".

An honest person of normal intelligence would also admit the models were spot on correct, and that warming has been ongoing without pause for the last 20 years. Cult liars would make it a point to lie big and pretend the opposite.

Again there is more ice as I've already proved to you on another thread so you're still saying warmer air makes ice. Right!!!!!!!

It is using the old Nazi tactic inspired by Gobbles. Repeat the lie incessantly and those who are ill informed will retain it as truth. Stifle the truth at every turn for your agenda. They called these people useful idiots. We call them low information voters..

 

[Billy_Bob]

Thing about this. The earth will shake us humans off like fleas. 99% of all species that ever lived are extinct, fact. Humans found a new way to extinguish ourselves, are we so clever? We need to be a step ahead. Co2 , overpopulation, civil conflict or disease will level us out and we end up with that other 99% of extinct species.

Mary, If you think for one minuet that we can control when nature will dispose of us, you are seriously mistaken. The average temperature on earth depends on the cycle we are in. Those cycles are separated by about 12 deg C in the extreme ends.

According to our current position we are entering a prolonged cooling age in the long term and our short term 90,000/14,000 year glaciation cycle/climate optimum is about to flip to the next glacial cycle and may already have given the Antarctic rapid ice increase.

The next 90,000 years are going to be interesting. The fact we have not prepared for it, because of CAGW lies will result in the deaths of millions.

You will note that each cooling trend has become deeper and longer over the last 12,000 years. WE are about to eenter the next glacial cycle. And it is a cycle.

Above is the Glacial cycle 90,000 years and each Warm cycle at about 14,000 years. We are embarking on the first step drop of 4-6 deg C drop, which occurs right after a temp spike historically.

What is coming can be predicted by observations and history. None of which is a fantasy model.

 

[Billy_Bob]

Thing about this. The earth will shake us humans off like fleas. 99% of all species that ever lived are extinct, fact. Humans found a new way to extinguish ourselves, are we so clever? We need to be a step ahead. Co2 , overpopulation, civil conflict or disease will level us out and we end up with that other 99% of extinct species.

You have a greater chance of dying from being hit with an asteroid while being bitten by a shark as you discover that you won the lottery than you will die form AGW..

Really? What killed the Dinosaurs, by chance? History isn't your strong suit.

You think that asteroids are something you control?

 

[Billy_Bob]

Really? What killed the Dinosaurs, by chance? History isn't your strong suit.

Not AGW!!

So you see what your odds are?

Speaking of odds. I don't gamble. Am I supposed to know what AGW means? I forgot my little orphan Annie decoder ring.

AGW = AL Gore's Wetdream

Gee, an Al Goreism. How quaint.

Reaching. Still. It's getting hot in here. Not made up like WMDs. Global warming, It is real as death.

OK... Prove that man is causing any of it...

 

[westwall]

No, the globe is not warming. It hasn't been for the last 18 years now. CO2 has been much higher in the past and global temperatures were lower than today. The same is true for higher temps and lower CO2 levels. Thus in the cold light of day the facts show us that in the trace elements in our atmosphere CO2 is not a player.

Why do you think the global warmers have tried so hard to hide any factual data? One other point....show me any program that the global warmers are pushing that actually reduces pollution. Not one of their programs actually reduces it. You merely have to pay more to do it. If you really think that they knew that what they were telling us was factual, do you really think they wouldn't be fighting tooth and nail to actually reduce pollution?

Think about it.

You live on earth, right, so that we are on the same page here. I am not your enemy. It's just that you seem to cherry pick facts that contradict scientific reality. I like the Hilary Clown thing, that works well for you.

No Mary, I am not cherry picking facts. I am pointing out to you that the Earths climate engine is far more complex than anything man has ever created. It also operates on time scales that are so much longer that things happening today, will not manifest themselves in the climate for hundreds of years. That is the reality that the global warmists can not let you know about.

I agree, I am not your enemy (have I spoken harshly to you? If I have, please forgive me for that is not my intent) but in the realm of cherry picking it is the global warming supporters who are guilty. Not the sceptics. We present factual, empirical data and the warmers present computer models. What's worse, is when the computer models have been shown to be wrong, the warmers have altered the actual data to make it conform to the models. That is scientific fraud.

I use the Hillary clown face because I have met her and it fully applies to her. She is a despicable clown. Bill, for all of his faults, and he has many, I like immensely, but Hillary is a unethical woman.

Wow, now Wally is using the creationist argument - irreducible complexity. Well, I can see how this gambit might work for deniers. By arguing that "god must have done it", they can at least have an out when it all goes south and the populous starts looking for someone to blame.

Bullcrap. I never said that God crated it. I said that it is complex, and it bloody well is. So complex that your tiny little mind hasn't a chance in hell of understanding even the barest minimum. Your attempt to paint me as a creationist are specious, ridiculous, and prevarications of the first order. Every single post, that I have made in the creationism/evolution argument has been on the side of evolution.

You are such a pathetic representative of the AGW supporters. You truly are. A sad, pathetic lying sack of poo.

It is amusing that you believe it to be so irreducibly complex, considering when we were talking about it earlier (and had the ground water conversation), you said it was all very simple. You are a creationist. Don't pretend that you are not. We've had conversations on several threads about evolution, and from those conversations, your position was very clear that you don't believe in evolution. We've also had several conversations on atheism, and your religious beliefs were made clear there as well.

No, I stated that ground water is comparatively simple. With groundwater the only variables are with the media that the water is traveling through. We KNOW every aspect of water and it's properties. Your outright lies about my agnosticism, (you seem to conflate a respect for people of religion with having a religious viewpoint) and support of the theory of evolution are amusing. Let's see you present a single post I have made where I do ONE thing that you just claimed olfraud. Just one.

 

[westwall]

The Global Warming Hoax's gold standard has long been the "Hockey stick graph". In Al Gore's Riefenstahlian propaganda film, "an inconvenient truth", the audience audibly gasps!! when the Hockey Stick graph is revealed. It sure looks DRAMATIC!! OMFG!! One can only conclude that (gasp!) Humans are ruining the climate!!! RUN FOR THE HILLS!!...RUN!!! ........ (but only after we advance our political agenda!)

But it turns out that the entire thing was a hoax. Just a "Michael Mann" made fable. There was no hockey stick. The data was fake. The entire statistical foundation upon which the Global warming hoax was built on was nothing but a miasma of lies, deceit, and malfeasance. They lied for $$$ and to advance a political agenda.

Despicable.

What is despicable is that you are one ignorant liar. The Hockey Stick Graph has been confirmed by over a dozen different studies using many different proxies.

What evidence is there for the hockey stick

Of course, these examples only go back around 500 years - this doesn't even cover theMedieval Warm Period. When you combine all the various proxies, including ice cores, coral, lake sediments, glaciers, boreholes & stalagmites, it's possible to reconstruct Northern Hemisphere temperatures without tree-ring proxies going back 1,300 years (Mann 2008). The result is that temperatures in recent decades exceed the maximumproxy estimate (including uncertainty range) for the past 1,300 years. When you include tree-ring data, the same result holds for the past 1,700 years.

Figure 6: Composite Northern Hemisphere land and land plus ocean temperaturereconstructions and estimated 95% confidence intervals. Shown for comparison are published Northern Hemisphere reconstructions (Mann 2008).

Paleoclimatology draws upon a range of proxies and methodologies to calculate past temperatures. This allows independent confirmation of the basic hockey stick result: that the past few decades are the hottest in the past 1,300 years.

Not according to real scientists.


Global Warming Bombshell
A prime piece of evidence linking human activity to climate change turns out to be an artifact of poor mathematics.

Global Warming Bombshell MIT Technology Review

 

[westwall]

Thing about this. The earth will shake us humans off like fleas. 99% of all species that ever lived are extinct, fact. Humans found a new way to extinguish ourselves, are we so clever? We need to be a step ahead. Co2 , overpopulation, civil conflict or disease will level us out and we end up with that other 99% of extinct species.

You have a greater chance of dying from being hit with an asteroid while being bitten by a shark as you discover that you won the lottery than you will die form AGW..

Really? What killed the Dinosaurs, by chance? History isn't your strong suit.

You think that asteroids are something you control?

Man actually is the first creature on this planet that has the ability to deflect a world killing asteroid. That is something that absolutely could wipe out mankind as one most likely did 65 million years ago with the dinosaurs. And all the time, while there is this known danger, the global control assholes whistle Dixie.

 

[orogenicman]

You live on earth, right, so that we are on the same page here. I am not your enemy. It's just that you seem to cherry pick facts that contradict scientific reality. I like the Hilary Clown thing, that works well for you.

No Mary, I am not cherry picking facts. I am pointing out to you that the Earths climate engine is far more complex than anything man has ever created. It also operates on time scales that are so much longer that things happening today, will not manifest themselves in the climate for hundreds of years. That is the reality that the global warmists can not let you know about.

I agree, I am not your enemy (have I spoken harshly to you? If I have, please forgive me for that is not my intent) but in the realm of cherry picking it is the global warming supporters who are guilty. Not the sceptics. We present factual, empirical data and the warmers present computer models. What's worse, is when the computer models have been shown to be wrong, the warmers have altered the actual data to make it conform to the models. That is scientific fraud.

I use the Hillary clown face because I have met her and it fully applies to her. She is a despicable clown. Bill, for all of his faults, and he has many, I like immensely, but Hillary is a unethical woman.

Wow, now Wally is using the creationist argument - irreducible complexity. Well, I can see how this gambit might work for deniers. By arguing that "god must have done it", they can at least have an out when it all goes south and the populous starts looking for someone to blame.

Bullcrap. I never said that God crated it. I said that it is complex, and it bloody well is. So complex that your tiny little mind hasn't a chance in hell of understanding even the barest minimum. Your attempt to paint me as a creationist are specious, ridiculous, and prevarications of the first order. Every single post, that I have made in the creationism/evolution argument has been on the side of evolution.

You are such a pathetic representative of the AGW supporters. You truly are. A sad, pathetic lying sack of poo.

It is amusing that you believe it to be so irreducibly complex, considering when we were talking about it earlier (and had the ground water conversation), you said it was all very simple. You are a creationist. Don't pretend that you are not. We've had conversations on several threads about evolution, and from those conversations, your position was very clear that you don't believe in evolution. We've also had several conversations on atheism, and your religious beliefs were made clear there as well.

No, I stated that ground water is comparatively simple. With groundwater the only variables are with the media that the water is traveling through. We KNOW every aspect of water and it's properties. Your outright lies about my agnosticism, (you seem to conflate a respect for people of religion with having a religious viewpoint) and support of the theory of evolution are amusing. Let's see you present a single post I have made where I do ONE thing that you just claimed olfraud. Just one.

Right. That explains why you never solved the challenge I presented to you. Because it is simple.

 

[mamooth]

Not according to real scientists

In Westwall's mind, a "real scientist" being anyone who agrees with his religious beliefs.

A prime piece of evidence linking human activity to climate change turns out to be an artifact of poor mathematics.

Global Warming Bombshell MIT Technology Review

Denier pseudoscience never dies. They just keep repeating it, forever, no matter how many times it gets debunked. McIntyre and McKitrick didn't use random noise, and followed by cherrypicking the 1% of their results that gave hockey sticks. They then spun about and lied brazenly that all random noise produced hockey sticks. That's why the real scientists consider them to be clowns and frauds.

 

[westwall]

No Mary, I am not cherry picking facts. I am pointing out to you that the Earths climate engine is far more complex than anything man has ever created. It also operates on time scales that are so much longer that things happening today, will not manifest themselves in the climate for hundreds of years. That is the reality that the global warmists can not let you know about.

I agree, I am not your enemy (have I spoken harshly to you? If I have, please forgive me for that is not my intent) but in the realm of cherry picking it is the global warming supporters who are guilty. Not the sceptics. We present factual, empirical data and the warmers present computer models. What's worse, is when the computer models have been shown to be wrong, the warmers have altered the actual data to make it conform to the models. That is scientific fraud.

I use the Hillary clown face because I have met her and it fully applies to her. She is a despicable clown. Bill, for all of his faults, and he has many, I like immensely, but Hillary is a unethical woman.

Wow, now Wally is using the creationist argument - irreducible complexity. Well, I can see how this gambit might work for deniers. By arguing that "god must have done it", they can at least have an out when it all goes south and the populous starts looking for someone to blame.

Bullcrap. I never said that God crated it. I said that it is complex, and it bloody well is. So complex that your tiny little mind hasn't a chance in hell of understanding even the barest minimum. Your attempt to paint me as a creationist are specious, ridiculous, and prevarications of the first order. Every single post, that I have made in the creationism/evolution argument has been on the side of evolution.

You are such a pathetic representative of the AGW supporters. You truly are. A sad, pathetic lying sack of poo.

It is amusing that you believe it to be so irreducibly complex, considering when we were talking about it earlier (and had the ground water conversation), you said it was all very simple. You are a creationist. Don't pretend that you are not. We've had conversations on several threads about evolution, and from those conversations, your position was very clear that you don't believe in evolution. We've also had several conversations on atheism, and your religious beliefs were made clear there as well.

No, I stated that ground water is comparatively simple. With groundwater the only variables are with the media that the water is traveling through. We KNOW every aspect of water and it's properties. Your outright lies about my agnosticism, (you seem to conflate a respect for people of religion with having a religious viewpoint) and support of the theory of evolution are amusing. Let's see you present a single post I have made where I do ONE thing that you just claimed olfraud. Just one.

Right. That explains why you never solved the challenge I presented to you. Because it is simple.

What challenge was that olfraud? You didn't give nearly enough information to elicit a response. You gave a generalized "problem" that had no information, just a bunch generalizations. Here's the deal, oreo boy, in the real world we actually DO solve problems, and those problems have facts attached. Give me some facts and I will be happy to jump through your little hoops.

Somehow I doubt you will be able to come up with anything, original thinking is not one of your strong points.

 

[westwall]

Not according to real scientists

In Westwall's mind, a "real scientist" being anyone who agrees with his religious beliefs.

A prime piece of evidence linking human activity to climate change turns out to be an artifact of poor mathematics.

Global Warming Bombshell MIT Technology Review

Denier pseudoscience never dies. They just keep repeating it, forever, no matter how many times it gets debunked. McIntyre and McKitrick didn't use random noise, and followed by cherrypicking the 1% of their results that gave hockey sticks. They then spun about and lied brazenly that all random noise produced hockey sticks. That's why the real scientists consider them to be clowns and frauds.

Sure thing bunky, that's why McIntyre has been the cause of how many of your pets paper retractions? Hmmm? The problem you have is the warmists are so bad at basic math that a mere statistician has shown them to be wrong on so many occasions they are now terrified whenever he even glances at one of their papers.

 

[orogenicman]

Wow, now Wally is using the creationist argument - irreducible complexity. Well, I can see how this gambit might work for deniers. By arguing that "god must have done it", they can at least have an out when it all goes south and the populous starts looking for someone to blame.

Bullcrap. I never said that God crated it. I said that it is complex, and it bloody well is. So complex that your tiny little mind hasn't a chance in hell of understanding even the barest minimum. Your attempt to paint me as a creationist are specious, ridiculous, and prevarications of the first order. Every single post, that I have made in the creationism/evolution argument has been on the side of evolution.

You are such a pathetic representative of the AGW supporters. You truly are. A sad, pathetic lying sack of poo.

It is amusing that you believe it to be so irreducibly complex, considering when we were talking about it earlier (and had the ground water conversation), you said it was all very simple. You are a creationist. Don't pretend that you are not. We've had conversations on several threads about evolution, and from those conversations, your position was very clear that you don't believe in evolution. We've also had several conversations on atheism, and your religious beliefs were made clear there as well.

No, I stated that ground water is comparatively simple. With groundwater the only variables are with the media that the water is traveling through. We KNOW every aspect of water and it's properties. Your outright lies about my agnosticism, (you seem to conflate a respect for people of religion with having a religious viewpoint) and support of the theory of evolution are amusing. Let's see you present a single post I have made where I do ONE thing that you just claimed olfraud. Just one.

Right. That explains why you never solved the challenge I presented to you. Because it is simple.

What challenge was that olfraud? You didn't give nearly enough information to elicit a response.

I was very specific in my challenge. And wally. I don't make a habit of repeating myself. My post is in his thread. I suggest you review it so you don't look more foolish than you already look.

 

[orogenicman]

Not according to real scientists

In Westwall's mind, a "real scientist" being anyone who agrees with his religious beliefs.

A prime piece of evidence linking human activity to climate change turns out to be an artifact of poor mathematics.

Global Warming Bombshell MIT Technology Review

Denier pseudoscience never dies. They just keep repeating it, forever, no matter how many times it gets debunked. McIntyre and McKitrick didn't use random noise, and followed by cherrypicking the 1% of their results that gave hockey sticks. They then spun about and lied brazenly that all random noise produced hockey sticks. That's why the real scientists consider them to be clowns and frauds.

Sure thing bunky, that's why McIntyre has been the cause of how many of your pets paper retractions? Hmmm? The problem you have is the warmists are so bad at basic math that a mere statistician has shown them to be wrong on so many occasions they are now terrified whenever he even glances at one of their papers.

To my knowledge, McInTyred wrote one peer reviewed paper related to climate science. In it, he found a small statistical problem that led to a revision in the original paper. However, that revision amounted to a hill of beans because it made no difference whatsoever in the outcome. Next.

 

[westwall]

Bullcrap. I never said that God crated it. I said that it is complex, and it bloody well is. So complex that your tiny little mind hasn't a chance in hell of understanding even the barest minimum. Your attempt to paint me as a creationist are specious, ridiculous, and prevarications of the first order. Every single post, that I have made in the creationism/evolution argument has been on the side of evolution.

You are such a pathetic representative of the AGW supporters. You truly are. A sad, pathetic lying sack of poo.

It is amusing that you believe it to be so irreducibly complex, considering when we were talking about it earlier (and had the ground water conversation), you said it was all very simple. You are a creationist. Don't pretend that you are not. We've had conversations on several threads about evolution, and from those conversations, your position was very clear that you don't believe in evolution. We've also had several conversations on atheism, and your religious beliefs were made clear there as well.

No, I stated that ground water is comparatively simple. With groundwater the only variables are with the media that the water is traveling through. We KNOW every aspect of water and it's properties. Your outright lies about my agnosticism, (you seem to conflate a respect for people of religion with having a religious viewpoint) and support of the theory of evolution are amusing. Let's see you present a single post I have made where I do ONE thing that you just claimed olfraud. Just one.

Right. That explains why you never solved the challenge I presented to you. Because it is simple.

What challenge was that olfraud? You didn't give nearly enough information to elicit a response.

I was very specific in my challenge. And wally. I don't make a habit of repeating myself. My post is in his thread. I suggest you review it so you don't look more foolish than you already look.

No, you weren't. It was a generalized problem dealing with water transport through karst. There was nothing specific. When we make models of aquifers we have actually done seismic surveys so we at least have a modicum of an idea of what we are dealing with.

You gave no details at all.

 

[westwall]

Not according to real scientists

In Westwall's mind, a "real scientist" being anyone who agrees with his religious beliefs.

A prime piece of evidence linking human activity to climate change turns out to be an artifact of poor mathematics.

Global Warming Bombshell MIT Technology Review

Denier pseudoscience never dies. They just keep repeating it, forever, no matter how many times it gets debunked. McIntyre and McKitrick didn't use random noise, and followed by cherrypicking the 1% of their results that gave hockey sticks. They then spun about and lied brazenly that all random noise produced hockey sticks. That's why the real scientists consider them to be clowns and frauds.

Sure thing bunky, that's why McIntyre has been the cause of how many of your pets paper retractions? Hmmm? The problem you have is the warmists are so bad at basic math that a mere statistician has shown them to be wrong on so many occasions they are now terrified whenever he even glances at one of their papers.

To my knowledge, McInTyred wrote one peer reviewed paper related to climate science. In it, he found a small statistical problem that led to a revision in the original paper. However, that revision amounted to a hill of beans because it made no difference whatsoever in the outcome. Next.

Your knowledge of the subject is remarkably limited then. Here are three of a bunch. Enjoy!

Paper claiming hottest 60-year-span in 1 000 years put on hold after being published online - Retraction Watch at Retraction Watch

Controversial paper linking conspiracy ideation to climate change skepticism formally retracted - Retraction Watch at Retraction Watch

Frontiers Retraction Recursive fury Conspiracist ideation in the blogosphere in response to research on conspiracist ideation Personality and Social Psychology