Winter Does Not Disprove Global Warming

[SwimExpert]

You keep saying that like it has some significance to the current abrupt human caused warming trend. It doesn't.

You don't have the slightest clue what constitutes an "abrupt" warming trend. The only recorded data that exists goes back a mere 125 years. The Earth has been around for 5 billion years. There is absolutely no scientific reason to say that anything happening in the past 100 years in terms of climate change is in any way unique or unusual. And consequently, you haven't the first shred of evidence that human activity has had any significant effect on climate change.

 

[RollingThunder]

You keep saying that like it has some significance to the current abrupt human caused warming trend. It doesn't.

You don't have the slightest clue what constitutes an "abrupt" warming trend. The only recorded data that exists goes back a mere 125 years. The Earth has been around for 5 billion years. There is absolutely no scientific reason to say that anything happening in the past 100 years in terms of climate change is in any way unique or unusual. And consequently, you haven't the first shred of evidence that human activity has had any significant effect on climate change.

Amazing post. Five sentences and you manage to be get it wrong every time. You're just demonstrating what an ignorant retard you are.

Your abject ignorance about this matter has absolutely no effect on the actual scientific understanding of the Earth's climate history.

Scientists Find an Abrupt Warm Jog After a Very Long Cooling
The New York Times
By ANDREW C. REVKIN
March 7, 2013
(excerpts)
There’s long been a general picture of the climate of the Holocene, the period of Earth history since the last ice age ended around 12,000 years ago. It goes like this: After a sharp stuttery warm-up following that big chill — to temperatures warmer than today — the climate cools, with the decline reaching bottom around 200 years ago in the period widely called the “little ice age.” In a new study, researchers from Oregon State University and Harvard have analyzed 11,300 years of data from 73 sites around the world and added more detail to this picture. The work, posted online today, is being published Friday in the journal Science. In a news release, Candace Major, program director for ocean sciences at the National Science Foundation, which paid for the research, said: "The last century stands out as the anomaly in this record of global temperature since the end of the last ice age…. This research shows that we’ve experienced almost the same range of temperature change since the beginning of the industrial revolution as over the previous 11,000 years of Earth history – but this change happened a lot more quickly."

While folks have long talked of “abrupt climate change” (as in NRC reports) as a plausible prospect, this paper builds on the idea that we’ve been in the midst of abrupt climate change since the early 20th century. Michael Mann [commented]: "This is an important paper. The key take-home conclusion is that the rate and magnitude of recent global warmth appears unprecedented for at least the past 4,000 years and the rate at least the past 11,000. We know that there were periods in the past that were warmer than today, for example the early Cretaceous period 100 million years ago. The real issue, from a climate change impacts point of view, is the rate of change –because that’s what challenges our adaptive capacity. And this paper suggests that the current rate has no precedent as far back as we can go with any confidence — 11,000 years arguably, based on this study. But, again, the take-home conclusion: the rate of warming appears to be unprecedented as far back as the authors are able to go (to the boundary with the last ice age)."

 

[skookerasbil]

Translated from 'retard-speak', he's saying: "I'm too ignorant and stupid to understand what the smart people who study this stuff professionally are saying about the complexities of the climate processes so they must be wrong".

Beware being trapped in an elevator with a religious convert. Used to be a concern about Jehovah's Witnesses. Maybe Hari Krishnas. These days the risk is far worse.

Global Warming Acolytes of The First Church of Algore.

They oughta have to wear distinctive clothing - or at least labels - so normal people could just wait for the next car.

Luckily, the chances of being trapped in an elevator with one of these meatheads is distinctly remote.........

The fringe nuts are social oddballs who don't get out a lot......that's how they get all tied into a "cause" like this. It could have been ANY cause but whatever it was, it had to provide something meaningful in life to these people. The social oddballs.......we all could see the emergence of them in our formative years........the last to get picked for the team types. They need to find a place to matter.......they join these fringe k00k societies like PITA and NOW.......and in this case, the society of environmental nutters. Its a safe place........a fall back onto consensus reality, science style with moral superiority perks. Always the same with these types. Its what any social oddball looks for. It doesn't matter if they win or lose.......it matters that they are part of SOMETHING

 

[RollingThunder]

You keep saying that ("we're in an ice age") like it has some significance to the current abrupt human caused warming trend. It doesn't.

You don't have the slightest clue what constitutes an "abrupt" warming trend. The only recorded data that exists goes back a mere 125 years. The Earth has been around for 5 billion years. There is absolutely no scientific reason to say that anything happening in the past 100 years in terms of climate change is in any way unique or unusual. And consequently, you haven't the first shred of evidence that human activity has had any significant effect on climate change.

Amazing post. Five sentences and you manage to be get it wrong every time. You're just demonstrating what an ignorant retard you are.

Your abject ignorance about this matter has absolutely no effect on the actual scientific understanding of the Earth's climate history.

Scientists Find an Abrupt Warm Jog After a Very Long Cooling
The New York Times
By ANDREW C. REVKIN
March 7, 2013
(excerpts)
There’s long been a general picture of the climate of the Holocene, the period of Earth history since the last ice age ended around 12,000 years ago. It goes like this: After a sharp stuttery warm-up following that big chill — to temperatures warmer than today — the climate cools, with the decline reaching bottom around 200 years ago in the period widely called the “little ice age.” In a new study, researchers from Oregon State University and Harvard have analyzed 11,300 years of data from 73 sites around the world and added more detail to this picture. The work, posted online today, is being published Friday in the journal Science. In a news release, Candace Major, program director for ocean sciences at the National Science Foundation, which paid for the research, said: "The last century stands out as the anomaly in this record of global temperature since the end of the last ice age…. This research shows that we’ve experienced almost the same range of temperature change since the beginning of the industrial revolution as over the previous 11,000 years of Earth history – but this change happened a lot more quickly."

While folks have long talked of “abrupt climate change” (as in NRC reports) as a plausible prospect, this paper builds on the idea that we’ve been in the midst of abrupt climate change since the early 20th century. Michael Mann [commented]: "This is an important paper. The key take-home conclusion is that the rate and magnitude of recent global warmth appears unprecedented for at least the past 4,000 years and the rate at least the past 11,000. We know that there were periods in the past that were warmer than today, for example the early Cretaceous period 100 million years ago. The real issue, from a climate change impacts point of view, is the rate of change –because that’s what challenges our adaptive capacity. And this paper suggests that the current rate has no precedent as far back as we can go with any confidence — 11,000 years arguably, based on this study. But, again, the take-home conclusion: the rate of warming appears to be unprecedented as far back as the authors are able to go (to the boundary with the last ice age)."

Okay, tell me something. What was the temperature in northern Mississippi on June 15, 16,357,643,745 years ago?

Retarded straw-man argument and also completely irrelevant to the topic of this thread or any other part of the science relevant to the abrupt warming trend the world is experiencing. Too bad you're such a deluded retard, SwineExlax.

 

[SwimExpert]

*insert failing babble here*

Okay, tell me something. What was the temperature in northern Mississippi on June 15, 16,357,643,745 years ago?

Retarded straw-man argument and also completely irrelevant to the topic of this thread or any other part of the science relevant to the abrupt warming trend the world is experiencing. Too bad you're such a deluded retard, SwineExlax.

Quite the contrary, it hits the nail on the head. You're just so deluded you can't understand how devoid of logic your entire position is.

 

[PredFan]

GW is a religion to the left. They have the argument surrounded so no matter how cold it gets they claim it's global warming. You gotta have faith to claim global warming when a Russian ship gets stuck in the ice during summertime in the southern hemisphere. Where is the cold weather coming from if the ice floes are melting, Mars? If it's warm in the Arctic how can it be seven degrees in Tennessee from an Arctic blast? You gotta have faith I guess.

Translated from 'retard-speak', he's saying: "I'm too ignorant and stupid to understand what the smart people who study this stuff professionally are saying about the complexities of the climate processes so they must be wrong".

smart people who study this stuff professionally aren't going to bite the hand that feeds them. That's because they are smart.

Unlike yourself.

 

[PredFan]

You keep saying that like it has some significance to the current abrupt human caused warming trend. It doesn't.

You don't have the slightest clue what constitutes an "abrupt" warming trend. The only recorded data that exists goes back a mere 125 years. The Earth has been around for 5 billion years. There is absolutely no scientific reason to say that anything happening in the past 100 years in terms of climate change is in any way unique or unusual. And consequently, you haven't the first shred of evidence that human activity has had any significant effect on climate change.

They only go back 150 years because that fits their religion. Its called cherry-picking the data. A real look at it would include data like this:

 

[PredFan]

Clearly, the SUVs and the coal fired power plants of 130K, 240K, and 330K years ago screwed the climate up.

 

[RollingThunder]

Okay, tell me something. What was the temperature in northern Mississippi on June 15, 16,357,643,745 years ago?

Retarded straw-man argument and also completely irrelevant to the topic of this thread or any other part of the science relevant to the abrupt warming trend the world is experiencing. Too bad you're such a deluded retard, SwineExlax.

Quite the contrary, it hits the nail on the head. You're just so deluded you can't understand how devoid of logic your entire position is.

LOLOLOLOL....OK, little retard, tell just how the specific temperature in one spot 16 million years ago is soooo important to the current abrupt global warming trend. Explain the "logic" of your demented "position", SwineExlax.

 

[RollingThunder]

GW is a religion to the left. They have the argument surrounded so no matter how cold it gets they claim it's global warming. You gotta have faith to claim global warming when a Russian ship gets stuck in the ice during summertime in the southern hemisphere. Where is the cold weather coming from if the ice floes are melting, Mars? If it's warm in the Arctic how can it be seven degrees in Tennessee from an Arctic blast? You gotta have faith I guess.

Translated from 'retard-speak', he's saying: "I'm too ignorant and stupid to understand what the smart people who study this stuff professionally are saying about the complexities of the climate processes so they must be wrong".

smart people who study this stuff professionally aren't going to bite the hand that feeds them. That's because they are smart.

Your deranged conspiracy theories about the climate scientists are still utterly retarded, you poor insane little anti-science moron.

 

[whitehall]

GW is a religion to the left. They have the argument surrounded so no matter how cold it gets they claim it's global warming. You gotta have faith to claim global warming when a Russian ship gets stuck in the ice during summertime in the southern hemisphere. Where is the cold weather coming from if the ice floes are melting, Mars? If it's warm in the Arctic how can it be seven degrees in Tennessee from an Arctic blast? You gotta have faith I guess.

Translated from 'retard-speak', he's saying: "I'm too ignorant and stupid to understand what the smart people who study this stuff professionally are saying about the complexities of the climate processes so they must be wrong".

I rest my case when defenders of the true religion of G.W. call themselves :smart people" without even having to defend their position.

 

[SwimExpert]

tell just how the specific temperature in one spot 16 million years ago is soooo important to the current abrupt global warming trend.

Because you have no basis to call anything an abrupt trend.

 

[RollingThunder]

GW is a religion to the left. They have the argument surrounded so no matter how cold it gets they claim it's global warming. You gotta have faith to claim global warming when a Russian ship gets stuck in the ice during summertime in the southern hemisphere. Where is the cold weather coming from if the ice floes are melting, Mars? If it's warm in the Arctic how can it be seven degrees in Tennessee from an Arctic blast? You gotta have faith I guess.

Translated from 'retard-speak', he's saying: "I'm too ignorant and stupid to understand what the smart people who study this stuff professionally are saying about the complexities of the climate processes so they must be wrong".

I rest my case when defenders of the true religion of G.W. call themselves :smart people" without even having to defend their position.

You have no "case", you poor deluded retard. All you've got are the myths, lies and pseudo-science held as dogmas by your crackpot cult of reality denial.

And BTW, witless, when I refer to "the smart people who study this stuff professionally", I'm obviously referring to the professional scientists who study the climate and global warming. They don't need to "defend their position" against the ignorant retarded drivel you spew. They are way smarter than you are, of course, as is almost everybody else on this planet.

 

[RollingThunder]

tell just how the specific temperature in one spot 16 million years ago is soooo important to the current abrupt global warming trend.

Because you have no basis to call anything an abrupt trend.

Both I and the climate scientists have ample basis to call what is happening to Earth's temperatures an abrupt global warming trend. I've cited research supporting this conclusion. You apparently imagine that your unsupported statements contradicting the conclusions of the climate scientists mean more than a fart in a hurricane. They don't. Your every post just further reveals you to be another clueless ignorant denier cult retard, spewing the myths and delusions of your cult.

 

[SwimExpert]

Both I and the climate scientists have ample basis to call what is happening to Earth's temperatures an abrupt global warming trend.

You have no basis for anything. All you are doing is regurgitating something that you heard somewhere, and simply decided to believe.

Now, I've already told you multiple times, we only have recorded data for the past 125ish years. That is a mere 2.5x10^-8 of the Earth's history. It is an eye blink in a human life time. For all you know, it is nothing more than a naturally occurring, momentary outlier. One that will disappear just as quickly as it appeared.

 

[Kosh]

tell just how the specific temperature in one spot 16 million years ago is soooo important to the current abrupt global warming trend.

Because you have no basis to call anything an abrupt trend.

Both I and the climate scientists have ample basis to call what is happening to Earth's temperatures an abrupt global warming trend. I've cited research supporting this conclusion. You apparently imagine that your unsupported statements contradicting the conclusions of the climate scientists mean more than a fart in a hurricane. They don't. Your every post just further reveals you to be another clueless ignorant denier cult retard, spewing the myths and delusions of your cult.

Really?

Climate scientist Dr. Murry Salby explains why man-made CO2 does not drive climate change
THE HOCKEY SCHTICK: Climate scientist Dr. Murry Salby explains why man-made CO2 does not drive climate change

He is a climate scientist and he certainly does agree with you.

Typical AGW cultist.

 

[RollingThunder]

Because you have no basis to call anything an abrupt trend.

Both I and the climate scientists have ample basis to call what is happening to Earth's temperatures an abrupt global warming trend. I've cited research supporting this conclusion. You apparently imagine that your unsupported statements contradicting the conclusions of the climate scientists mean more than a fart in a hurricane. They don't. Your every post just further reveals you to be another clueless ignorant denier cult retard, spewing the myths and delusions of your cult.

Really?

Climate scientist Dr. Murry Salby explains why man-made CO2 does not drive climate change
THE HOCKEY SCHTICK: Climate scientist Dr. Murry Salby explains why man-made CO2 does not drive climate change

He is a climate scientist and he certainly does agree with you.

Typical AGW cultist.

We just went thru this, Klod, over here on another thread. Your source is a joke. Which is fitting 'cause so are you.

Climate scientist Dr. Murry Salby, Professor and Climate Chair at Macquarie University, Australia explains in a recent, highly-recommended lecture presented at Helmut Schmidt University, Hamburg, Germany, why man-made CO2 is not the driver of atmospheric CO2 or climate change. Dr. Salby demonstrates:

ROTFLMAO.....you are one incredibly gullible retard, Klod. Do you think you can rustle up any sources denying AGW who aren't corrupt criminals?

Climate Sceptic Professor Sacked From Australian University Was Banned By National Science Foundation For "Deceptive Conduct"
2013-07-12
(excerpts)
A CLIMATE sceptic professor fired from his Australian university for alleged policy breaches had previously been banned for three years from accessing US taxpayer-funded science research money. Dr Murry Salby, sacked in May by Macquarie University in Sydney, was the subject of a long investigation by the US National Science Foundation. The investigation (pdf), which was finished in February 2009, concluded that over a period when Dr Salby was working at the University of Colorado, he had likely fabricated time sheets in relation to research paid for through NSF money.

We conclude that the Subject (Dr Salby) has engaged in a long-running course of deceptive conduct involving both his University and NSF. His conduct reflects a consistent willingness to violate rules and regulations, whether federal or local, for his personal benefit. This supports a finding that the Subject is not presently responsible, and we recommend that he be debarred for five years.​

The NSF reported in a bulletin on the investigation into Dr Salby:

Our investigation revealed that the subject (Dr Salby), consistently and over a period of many years, violated or disregarded various federal and NSF award administration requirements, violated university policies related to conflicts and outside compensation, and repeatedly misled both NSF and the university as to material facts about his outside companies and other matters relating to NSF awards.​

In relation to these companies, the investigation found:

After many years of operation of the first company, the subject created a second, for-profit company that acted as a subcontractor to the first company. The subject was the sole owner and employee of the second company, which existed solely to receive grant funds from the first company and pay them to the subject as salary.​

In relation to the time sheets, a report of the investigation said:

When we asked him (Dr Salby) to supply supporting documentation for the salary payments, the subject provided timesheets reflecting highly implausible work hours—for example, the subject claimed effort averaging nearly 14 hours a day for 98 continuous days between May and August 2002 (including weekends and holidays), and in other instances claimed to have devoted as much as 21 hours per day to the project.​

 

[Kosh]

Both I and the climate scientists have ample basis to call what is happening to Earth's temperatures an abrupt global warming trend. I've cited research supporting this conclusion. You apparently imagine that your unsupported statements contradicting the conclusions of the climate scientists mean more than a fart in a hurricane. They don't. Your every post just further reveals you to be another clueless ignorant denier cult retard, spewing the myths and delusions of your cult.

Really?

Climate scientist Dr. Murry Salby explains why man-made CO2 does not drive climate change
THE HOCKEY SCHTICK: Climate scientist Dr. Murry Salby explains why man-made CO2 does not drive climate change

He is a climate scientist and he certainly does agree with you.

Typical AGW cultist.

We just went thru this, Klod, over here on another thread. Your source is a joke. Which is fitting 'cause so are you.

Climate scientist Dr. Murry Salby, Professor and Climate Chair at Macquarie University, Australia explains in a recent, highly-recommended lecture presented at Helmut Schmidt University, Hamburg, Germany, why man-made CO2 is not the driver of atmospheric CO2 or climate change. Dr. Salby demonstrates:

ROTFLMAO.....you are one incredibly gullible retard, Klod. Do you think you can rustle up any sources denying AGW who aren't corrupt criminals?

Climate Sceptic Professor Sacked From Australian University Was Banned By National Science Foundation For "Deceptive Conduct"
2013-07-12
(excerpts)
A CLIMATE sceptic professor fired from his Australian university for alleged policy breaches had previously been banned for three years from accessing US taxpayer-funded science research money. Dr Murry Salby, sacked in May by Macquarie University in Sydney, was the subject of a long investigation by the US National Science Foundation. The investigation (pdf), which was finished in February 2009, concluded that over a period when Dr Salby was working at the University of Colorado, he had likely fabricated time sheets in relation to research paid for through NSF money.

We conclude that the Subject (Dr Salby) has engaged in a long-running course of deceptive conduct involving both his University and NSF. His conduct reflects a consistent willingness to violate rules and regulations, whether federal or local, for his personal benefit. This supports a finding that the Subject is not presently responsible, and we recommend that he be debarred for five years.​

The NSF reported in a bulletin on the investigation into Dr Salby:

Our investigation revealed that the subject (Dr Salby), consistently and over a period of many years, violated or disregarded various federal and NSF award administration requirements, violated university policies related to conflicts and outside compensation, and repeatedly misled both NSF and the university as to material facts about his outside companies and other matters relating to NSF awards.​

In relation to these companies, the investigation found:

After many years of operation of the first company, the subject created a second, for-profit company that acted as a subcontractor to the first company. The subject was the sole owner and employee of the second company, which existed solely to receive grant funds from the first company and pay them to the subject as salary.​

In relation to the time sheets, a report of the investigation said:

When we asked him (Dr Salby) to supply supporting documentation for the salary payments, the subject provided timesheets reflecting highly implausible work hours—for example, the subject claimed effort averaging nearly 14 hours a day for 98 continuous days between May and August 2002 (including weekends and holidays), and in other instances claimed to have devoted as much as 21 hours per day to the project.​

Bingo! AGW propaganda trumps real science.

Typical of the AGW cultists who can only post propaganda and lies to back up their religion.

 

[mudwhistle]

Only brain damaged liberals still cling to the Al Gore inspired nonsense of 'Global Warming'.

All they need to do is stick their head out the front door for 30 seconds to feel the bitter cold reality of a record setting winter. ...

Actually, only brain damaged rightwingnuts still cling to the denier cult myth that the Earth isn't warming, in spite of all of the scientific evidence showing that it is, in fact, rapidly warming.

All the rightwingnuts foolishly imagine they need to do is stick their head out the front door in order to know what the climate around the world is doing. The poor delusional retards are too stupid to understand the difference between the weather in their front yard one year in the wintertime and global climate all around the world all year for many years.

2013 is the 4th warmest year on record globally.

This last November was the warmest November on record globally.

Last month, December 2013, was the 346th consecutive month with a global temperature higher than the 20th century average.

2010 is tied with 2005 as the hottest year on record.

The decade from 2001 to 2010 was the hottest decade on record.

From 1998 to now, every year ranks among the hottest years on record.

The coolest years since 1998 are still hotter than the hottest years before 1998.

Only brainwashed retards and insane conspiracy theory nutjobs can look at these facts and the mountains of other evidence and data that the scientists have collected, and still remain in denial about the abrupt warming and the resultant climate changes that are obviously happening.

Where did you get this garbage from?

It is well known that this year was cooler than normal and that this will be one of the coldest winters on record. More records were set in the last week for freezing temperatures. 90% of the U.S. is frozen as we speak. The average temperature of the U.S. is 14.4 degrees. A ship full of Global Warming scientists had to be rescued from an ice breaker last week in the Antarctic because they got froze in.

What does the left think caused all of this? Global Warming. They claim that melting ice is putting out huge masses of cold air calling it a polar vortex.

 

[jon_berzerk]

Both I and the climate scientists have ample basis to call what is happening to Earth's temperatures an abrupt global warming trend.

You have no basis for anything. All you are doing is regurgitating something that you heard somewhere, and simply decided to believe.

Now, I've already told you multiple times, we only have recorded data for the past 125ish years. That is a mere 2.5x10^-8 of the Earth's history. It is an eye blink in a human life time. For all you know, it is nothing more than a naturally occurring, momentary outlier. One that will disappear just as quickly as it appeared.

we only have recorded data for the past 125ish years

and much of that inaccurate