UH OH Spaghetti Oh! Hansen says the temps have been flat!

[SSDD]

So, let's do a little prognosticating here. I say that the next time that we have a significant El Nino, that the years of 1998, 2005, and 2010 will seem insignificant. Now, you on the other side, who claim that it is cooling, or at least not warming, what do you predict? Got enough balls to come right out and make a prediction?

I predict that the trend for the last 100 years will continue. There has been no cooling period for the last 100 years. Each warming period is followed by a flat period and the next warming period begins where the previous flat period left off. So there will be no cooling period in the future and this flat period will continue until the next warming period starts from our flat point now.[/QUOTE]

So there was no little ice age following the medieval warm period?

 

[SSDD]

Who forced him and how did they do it?

The facts....the observable evidence that you warmers so handily ignore.

Hansen finally acknowledging that temps have been flat for quite some time may well be the first real evidence of the rats abandoning the sinking SS AGW. Now that a couple of the big rats have made moves towards the exit, don't be overly surprised if a real exodus begins.

 

[SSDD]

That was caused by us putting shit into the Atmosphere. The cooling effect of the energy reflecting off of that helped to stop the warming.

Got anything close to hard evidence to support that claim? Observed evidence, I mean, not to be confused with the fiction that spews from computer models.

 

[westwall]

I predict that the trend for the last 100 years will continue. There has been no cooling period for the last 100 years. Each warming period is followed by a flat period and the next warming period begins where the previous flat period left off. So there will be no cooling period in the future and this flat period will continue until the next warming period starts from our flat point now.

Ummm, what about that cold snap from the 60's through the 70's. I understand you weren't born then, but you really should do a teensy weensy little tiny bit of research before you go and make a fool of yourself.

I was born in the 1940s and there was no "cold" snap in the 1960s and 1970s. There was a FLAT period at the elevated levels from the warming that started in the 1910s. But you knew that already from your extensive research.

That's not what this paper says, and there are many more like it. They also say the warming of the 1910 to 1940 period was much more pronounced than that of this cycle.

I was born in the 40's. There is no way you were too. You argument style is sooooo 1980's.



http://www.lanl.gov/source/orgs/ees/ees14/pdfs/09Chlylek.pdf

 

[edthecynic]

I predict that the trend for the last 100 years will continue. There has been no cooling period for the last 100 years. Each warming period is followed by a flat period and the next warming period begins where the previous flat period left off. So there will be no cooling period in the future and this flat period will continue until the next warming period starts from our flat point now.

So there was no little ice age following the medieval warm period?

There was no "little ice age" in the last 100 years. It is amazing just how ignorant you know-it-alls are!

If warming and cooling are the natural cycles, there probably should have been some kind of little ice age type of cool down at some point over the last 100 years, so why was there none?

 

[edthecynic]

Ummm, what about that cold snap from the 60's through the 70's. I understand you weren't born then, but you really should do a teensy weensy little tiny bit of research before you go and make a fool of yourself.

I was born in the 1940s and there was no "cold" snap in the 1960s and 1970s. There was a FLAT period at the elevated levels from the warming that started in the 1910s. But you knew that already from your extensive research.

That's not what this paper says, and there are many more like it. They also say the warming of the 1910 to 1940 period was much more pronounced than that of this cycle.

I was born in the 40's. There is no way you were too. You argument style is sooooo 1980's.
http://www.lanl.gov/source/orgs/ees/ees14/pdfs/09Chlylek.pdf

The "cold snap" of the 1960s and 70s at its coldest point was at least 3 degrees C warmer than 1910, so it was only a "cold snap" relative to the elevated temperatures after 1910.

Annual Global Land and Ocean Temperature Anomalies

 

[daveman]

Still trolling...Still blundering....Still no significant warming, according to the Pope of the Chicken Little Cult..

Still the stupid ass.

Nine out of the ten hottest years on record in this decade. In spite of a couple strong La Nina's and a low Total Solar Irradiance for a few years. And in 2005 and 2010, the super El Nino record year of 1998 was surpasses, without a significant El Nino. The El Nino of 2010 was weak to moderate, and only lasted the first six months, the last months of 2010 were in La Nina. Yet it was hotter than 1998.

So, let's do a little prognosticating here. I say that the next time that we have a significant El Nino, that the years of 1998, 2005, and 2010 will seem insignificant. Now, you on the other side, who claim that it is cooling, or at least not warming, what do you predict? Got enough balls to come right out and make a prediction?

So, Hansen no longer speaks for your cult?

He's been excommunicated.

 

[RollingThunder]

I'm interested in how we're going to warm up 3c in 87 years? We hardly done 2c coming out of the little ice age(1680-2000). That would be quite the event to behold.

So then....the physics of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere has totally escaped your comprehension thus far? That's too bad. It is actually quite possible, according to a number of scientific studies, that the world will see a six degree increase in temperatures by the end of the century. This would be utterly catastrophic for the Earth's biosphere (mass extinctions) and would inevitably be accompanied by at least several feet, more likely several yards, of sea level rise. Of course, unless the world begins very soon to drastically reduce human industrial and transportation carbon emissions, the warming and sea level rises will not end in 2100 but rather will continue for many centuries.

Even at the current CO2 levels of just under 400ppm, even if the levels weren't still rapidly rising, the world would see considerably more warming and sea level rise over the next few centuries. If we let CO2 levels continue to rise at current rates, the damage to our world will be much, much more severe and impossible to reverse.

Last Time Carbon Dioxide Levels Were This High: 15 Million Years Ago, Scientists Report
ScienceDaily
Oct. 9, 2009
(excerpts)
You would have to go back at least 15 million years to find carbon dioxide levels on Earth as high as they are today, a UCLA scientist and colleagues report Oct. 8 in the online edition of the journal Science. "The last time carbon dioxide levels were apparently as high as they are today — and were sustained at those levels — global temperatures were 5 to 10 degrees Fahrenheit higher than they are today, the sea level was approximately 75 to 120 feet higher than today, there was no permanent sea ice cap in the Arctic and very little ice on Antarctica and Greenland," said the paper's lead author, Aradhna Tripati, a UCLA assistant professor in the department of Earth and space sciences and the department of atmospheric and oceanic sciences. "Carbon dioxide is a potent greenhouse gas, and geological observations that we now have for the last 20 million years lend strong support to the idea that carbon dioxide is an important agent for driving climate change throughout Earth's history", she said. "A slightly shocking finding", Tripati said, "is that the only time in the last 20 million years that we find evidence for carbon dioxide levels similar to the modern level of 387 parts per million was 15 to 20 million years ago, when the planet was dramatically different."

Levels of carbon dioxide have varied only between 180 and 300 parts per million over the last 800,000 years — until recent decades, said Tripati, who is also a member of UCLA's Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics. It has been known that modern-day levels of carbon dioxide are unprecedented over the last 800,000 years, but the finding that modern levels have not been reached in the last 15 million years is new. Prior to the Industrial Revolution of the late 19th and early 20th centuries, the carbon dioxide level was about 280 parts per million, Tripati said. That figure had changed very little over the previous 1,000 years. But since the Industrial Revolution, the carbon dioxide level has been rising and is likely to soar unless action is taken to reverse the trend, Tripati said. "During the Middle Miocene (the time period approximately 14 to 20 million years ago), carbon dioxide levels were sustained at about 400 parts per million, which is about where we are today," Tripati said. "Globally, temperatures were 5 to 10 degrees Fahrenheit warmer, a huge amount."

"The last time carbon dioxide levels were apparently as high as they are today — and were sustained at those levels — global temperatures were 5 to 10 degrees Fahrenheit higher than they are today, the sea level was approximately 75 to 120 feet higher than today, there was no permanent sea ice cap in the Arctic and very little ice on Antarctica and Greenland,"

So why aren't the temps as high now as back then?

Because humans have added CO2 to the atmosphere so fast that it will take time for the temperatures to catch up. The process is not instantaneous. If current CO2 levels "were sustained at those levels" for a century or two, world average temperatures would be that high and sea levels would be vastly increased.

 

[RollingThunder]

So, let's do a little prognosticating here. I say that the next time that we have a significant El Nino, that the years of 1998, 2005, and 2010 will seem insignificant. Now, you on the other side, who claim that it is cooling, or at least not warming, what do you predict? Got enough balls to come right out and make a prediction?

I predict that the trend for the last 100 years will continue. There has been no cooling period for the last 100 years. Each warming period is followed by a flat period and the next warming period begins where the previous flat period left off. So there will be no cooling period in the future and this flat period will continue until the next warming period starts from our flat point now.

So there was no little ice age following the medieval warm period?

LOLOLOLOL.....still flaunting your utter retardation, I see.....LOLOLOL....

He said: "I predict that the trend for the last 100 years will continue. There has been no cooling period for the last 100 years."

So, tell us all, little retard, did the MWP and the LIA happen in the last hundred years?

That was caused by us putting shit into the Atmosphere. The cooling effect of the energy reflecting off of that helped to stop the warming.

Got anything close to hard evidence to support that claim? Observed evidence, I mean, not to be confused with the fiction that spews from computer models.

I just posted that evidence in post #36, you blind imbecile.

 

[daveman]

Because humans have added CO2 to the atmosphere so fast that it will take time for the temperatures to catch up. The process is not instantaneous. If current CO2 levels "were sustained at those levels" for a century or two, world average temperatures would be that high and sea levels would be vastly increased.

A century or two?

Then you admit the current dire predictions of catastrophe to be experienced in just decades are bullshit.

 

[westwall]

So then....the physics of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere has totally escaped your comprehension thus far? That's too bad. It is actually quite possible, according to a number of scientific studies, that the world will see a six degree increase in temperatures by the end of the century. This would be utterly catastrophic for the Earth's biosphere (mass extinctions) and would inevitably be accompanied by at least several feet, more likely several yards, of sea level rise. Of course, unless the world begins very soon to drastically reduce human industrial and transportation carbon emissions, the warming and sea level rises will not end in 2100 but rather will continue for many centuries.

Even at the current CO2 levels of just under 400ppm, even if the levels weren't still rapidly rising, the world would see considerably more warming and sea level rise over the next few centuries. If we let CO2 levels continue to rise at current rates, the damage to our world will be much, much more severe and impossible to reverse.

Last Time Carbon Dioxide Levels Were This High: 15 Million Years Ago, Scientists Report
ScienceDaily
Oct. 9, 2009
(excerpts)
You would have to go back at least 15 million years to find carbon dioxide levels on Earth as high as they are today, a UCLA scientist and colleagues report Oct. 8 in the online edition of the journal Science. "The last time carbon dioxide levels were apparently as high as they are today — and were sustained at those levels — global temperatures were 5 to 10 degrees Fahrenheit higher than they are today, the sea level was approximately 75 to 120 feet higher than today, there was no permanent sea ice cap in the Arctic and very little ice on Antarctica and Greenland," said the paper's lead author, Aradhna Tripati, a UCLA assistant professor in the department of Earth and space sciences and the department of atmospheric and oceanic sciences. "Carbon dioxide is a potent greenhouse gas, and geological observations that we now have for the last 20 million years lend strong support to the idea that carbon dioxide is an important agent for driving climate change throughout Earth's history", she said. "A slightly shocking finding", Tripati said, "is that the only time in the last 20 million years that we find evidence for carbon dioxide levels similar to the modern level of 387 parts per million was 15 to 20 million years ago, when the planet was dramatically different."

Levels of carbon dioxide have varied only between 180 and 300 parts per million over the last 800,000 years — until recent decades, said Tripati, who is also a member of UCLA's Institute of Geophysics and Planetary Physics. It has been known that modern-day levels of carbon dioxide are unprecedented over the last 800,000 years, but the finding that modern levels have not been reached in the last 15 million years is new. Prior to the Industrial Revolution of the late 19th and early 20th centuries, the carbon dioxide level was about 280 parts per million, Tripati said. That figure had changed very little over the previous 1,000 years. But since the Industrial Revolution, the carbon dioxide level has been rising and is likely to soar unless action is taken to reverse the trend, Tripati said. "During the Middle Miocene (the time period approximately 14 to 20 million years ago), carbon dioxide levels were sustained at about 400 parts per million, which is about where we are today," Tripati said. "Globally, temperatures were 5 to 10 degrees Fahrenheit warmer, a huge amount."

"The last time carbon dioxide levels were apparently as high as they are today — and were sustained at those levels — global temperatures were 5 to 10 degrees Fahrenheit higher than they are today, the sea level was approximately 75 to 120 feet higher than today, there was no permanent sea ice cap in the Arctic and very little ice on Antarctica and Greenland,"

So why aren't the temps as high now as back then?

Because humans have added CO2 to the atmosphere so fast that it will take time for the temperatures to catch up. The process is not instantaneous. If current CO2 levels "were sustained at those levels" for a century or two, world average temperatures would be that high and sea levels would be vastly increased.

Funny, that has never been stated by your high priests, ever...in fact they have proclaimed just the opposite...


World has only ten years to control global warming, warns Met Office

World has only ten years to control global warming, warns Met Office - Telegraph

Dr. Hansen has said in the past that a global tipping point will be reached by 2016 if levels of greenhouse gases like methane and carbon dioxide are not reduced.

Earth's Climate Approaches Dangerous Tipping Point

Within as little as 10 years, the world will be faced with a choice: arable farming either continues to feed the world's animals or it continues to feed the world's people. It cannot do both.

George Monbiot: Why vegans were right all along | Global development | The Guardian


Etc. etc. etc. You are a broken record pushing your little drug induced cult.

 

[RollingThunder]

Because humans have added CO2 to the atmosphere so fast that it will take time for the temperatures to catch up. The process is not instantaneous. If current CO2 levels "were sustained at those levels" for a century or two, world average temperatures would be that high and sea levels would be vastly increased.

A century or two?

Yeah, possibly as much as a century or two for the temperatures to rise 8 or 10 degrees and come to an equilibrium with the CO2 levels.

Then you admit the current dire predictions of catastrophe to be experienced in just decades are bullshit.

Nope. That's not at all what I said, DaveDumb. Things are going to get quite serious for our present human civilization long, long before the temperatures rise 8+ degrees and the oceans rise by a 100 feet.

"The last time carbon dioxide levels were apparently as high as they are today — and were sustained at those levels — global temperatures were 5 to 10 degrees Fahrenheit higher than they are today, the sea level was approximately 75 to 120 feet higher than today, there was no permanent sea ice cap in the Arctic and very little ice on Antarctica and Greenland,"

 

[daveman]

Because humans have added CO2 to the atmosphere so fast that it will take time for the temperatures to catch up. The process is not instantaneous. If current CO2 levels "were sustained at those levels" for a century or two, world average temperatures would be that high and sea levels would be vastly increased.

A century or two?

Yeah, possibly as much as a century or two for the temperatures to rise 8 or 10 degrees and come to an equilibrium with the CO2 levels.

Then you admit the current dire predictions of catastrophe to be experienced in just decades are bullshit.

Nope. That's not at all what I said, DaveDumb. Things are going to get quite serious for our present human civilization long, long before the temperatures rise 8+ degrees and the oceans rise by a 100 feet.

"The last time carbon dioxide levels were apparently as high as they are today — and were sustained at those levels — global temperatures were 5 to 10 degrees Fahrenheit higher than they are today, the sea level was approximately 75 to 120 feet higher than today, there was no permanent sea ice cap in the Arctic and very little ice on Antarctica and Greenland,"

Whatever you say, Chicken Little.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

So much for the claims of 2012 being the HOTTEST YEAR EVAH! Fools.

LOLOLOLOLOLOL.....oh walleyed, you are soooo funny.....and sooooooooooo retarded.....

2012 is the hottest year on record in the contiguous US of A, moron. Not the world.

2012 hottest year on record in contiguous U.S., NOAA says
The Washington Post
January 08, 2013
(excerpts)
Temperatures in the contiguous United States last year were the hottest in more than a century of record-keeping, shattering the mark set in 1998 by a wide margin, the federal government announced Tuesday. The average temperature in 2012 was 55.3 degrees, one degree above the previous record and 3.2 degrees higher than the 20th-century average, scientists at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration said. They described the data as part of a longer-term trend of hotter, drier and potentially more extreme weather.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Hansen and colleagues argue that that the global temperature trend won't stay stopped:

... the continuing planetary energy imbalance and the rapid increase of CO2 emissions from fossil fuel use assure that global warming will continue on decadal time scales. Moreover, our interpretation of the larger role of unforced variability in temperature change of the past decade, suggests that global temperature will rise significantly in the next few years as the tropics moves inevitably into the next El Nino phase.
Global Warming at a "Standstill" Admits Man-Made Warming Proponent Hansen - Hit & Run : Reason.com

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Richard Muller, Global Warming Skeptic, Now Agrees Climate Change Is Real

WASHINGTON — A prominent physicist and skeptic of global warming spent two years trying to find out if mainstream climate scientists were wrong. In the end, he determined they were right: Temperatures really are rising rapidly.

The study of the world's surface temperatures by Richard Muller was partially bankrolled by a foundation connected to global warming deniers. He pursued long-held skeptic theories in analyzing the data. He was spurred to action because of "Climategate," a British scandal involving hacked emails of scientists.

Yet he found that the land is 1.6 degrees warmer than in the 1950s. Those numbers from Muller, who works at the University of California, Berkeley and Lawrence Berkeley National Lab, match those by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and NASA.

He said he went even further back, studying readings from Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Jefferson. His ultimate finding of a warming world, to be presented at a conference Monday, is no different from what mainstream climate scientists have been saying for decades.

Richard Muller, Global Warming Skeptic, Now Agrees Climate Change Is Real

 

[boedicca]

Frankly, we should all be making burnt offerings to the Climate Change Gods in order to keep up the Global Warming. Considering how much of the earth's history has been spent as a giant snowball in space, Global Warming has been Very Very Good to Human Beings.

 

[IanC]

NASA Admits that 1934, Not 1998, was the Warmest Year on Record - Yahoo! Voices - voices.yahoo.com

In one more devastating blow against the global warming or "climate Apocalypse" supporters such as former Vice President Al Gore, NASA stated today that it was wrong when it release a report that 1998 was the warmest year ever recorded in modern history.
According to H. Sterling Burnett, a senior fellow at the National Center for Policy Analysis (NCPA), NASA scientist and famous man-made global warming proponent James Hansen's well-known claims that 1998 was measured as the warmest year on record in the U.S. were the result of a serious mathematical error. NASA has now corrected that error, and 1934 is now known as the warmest year on record, with 1921 the third warmest year instead of 2006 as was also previously claimed.

5 1/2 years ago GISS said 1934 was the warmest ever. warmer than 1998. now through the wonders of 'adjustments' it is 2012.

I call bullsh*t

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Frankly, we should all be making burnt offerings to the Climate Change Gods in order to keep up the Global Warming. Considering how much of the earth's history has been spent as a giant snowball in space, Global Warming has been Very Very Good to Human Beings.

thinning the herd helps too

 

[RollingThunder]

"The last time carbon dioxide levels were apparently as high as they are today — and were sustained at those levels — global temperatures were 5 to 10 degrees Fahrenheit higher than they are today, the sea level was approximately 75 to 120 feet higher than today, there was no permanent sea ice cap in the Arctic and very little ice on Antarctica and Greenland,"

So why aren't the temps as high now as back then?

Because humans have added CO2 to the atmosphere so fast that it will take time for the temperatures to catch up. The process is not instantaneous. If current CO2 levels "were sustained at those levels" for a century or two, world average temperatures would be that high and sea levels would be vastly increased.

Funny, that has never been stated by your high priests, ever...in fact they have proclaimed just the opposite...

LOLOLOLOLOL.....I see you've totally lost the thread again, walleyed.....are you still drunk???.....let me refresh your memory, you poor befuddled retard.....I posted an article referencing a scientific study showing that when CO2 levels were this high in the past, which hasn't happened in the last 15 million years, planetary temperatures were 5 to 10 degrees warmer and sea levels were 75 to 125 feet higher than today. The Ass-ter asked why temperatures aren't that hot now and I gave the answer you are so very idiotically responding to. Just because it would take a while for temperatures to catch up and equilibrate with the 'forcing' of the extra CO2 mankind has put into the air, assuming current CO2 levels were "sustained" at current levels (about 400ppm) for a long period of time, does not mean that, in the real world with rapidly rising CO2 levels that may hit 600ppm or even 900ppm, we aren't facing an immediate crisis that needs an immediate response or that there aren't some pretty severe consequences starting to happen now or that there aren't tipping points/feedback loops in wait that could potentially cause uncontrollable run-away global warming, possibly, for example, through the release of the methane under the permafrost or from the undersea methane clathrates.

World has only ten years to control global warming, warns Met Office

World has only ten years to control global warming, warns Met Office - Telegraph

Dr. Hansen has said in the past that a global tipping point will be reached by 2016 if levels of greenhouse gases like methane and carbon dioxide are not reduced.

Earth's Climate Approaches Dangerous Tipping Point

Within as little as 10 years, the world will be faced with a choice: arable farming either continues to feed the world's animals or it continues to feed the world's people. It cannot do both.

George Monbiot: Why vegans were right all along | Global development | The Guardian

All quite true, unfortunately. And not at all contradicted by what I said, as you so idiotically imagine.

You are a broken record pushing your little drug induced cult.

LOLOLOLOL.....yes, I'm sure all of those tens of thousands of scientists all around the world are "on drugs".....LOLOLOL......

Meanwhile, you are a deluded and very ignorant little cretin pushing the myths, misinformation and lies of your stupidity induced, fossil fuel industry sponsored cult of rightwingnut reality denial.