scientists are worried about a surprisingly cold ‘blob’ in the North Atlantic Ocean

[FAST]

Sure. My point is that you were seemingly saying the weather channel is infallible. Which would be a ludicrous belief.

The only thing I've been arguing here is that you don't know for sure that the cold winters haven't been caused, at their root, by melting, land-based ice.

Didn't mean to imply that the weather channel was infallible,...but simply to demonstrate that weather forecasters have been using high and low pressure areas predictable influence on the jet stream to make quite accurate weather predictions,...accurate enough for airlines to plot flights across the Atlantic to save fuel.

The Polar Vortex,...which has existed for EVER,...is predicatively influenced/controlled by the jet stream and low/high pressure areas,...weather prediction software is based on these factors.

AMOC is still an unknown,...as to how it actually influences weather.

I have never said the melting, land-based ice was not possibly a contributing factor that caused the POLAR VORTEX to move south,...that in fact caused of the last 2 record setting North American winters, but as the government sponsored blocks of experts readily admit,...still just an unproven theory.

FAST

 

[FAST]

You claimed that the 'blob' and/or AMOC slowdown was really just Polar Vortex effects, and that it was nothing new.
I know its hard, but try putting 2+2 together.

This claim that the polar vortex has been around for a long time and is causing this newer AMOC slowdown is your claim.
Its up to you to provide some proof for this totally ridiculous, hairbrained theory, not me.

What a surprise,...yet another post from footer full of lies,...

Keep it up,...it really doesn't matter,...your reputation can't get much worse.

FAST

 

[basketcase]

...
A question for you,...why does footer's favorite UNEMPLOYABLE's site NOT publish the same illustration,... showing records being set prior to 2012,...rather useless,...don't ya think.

Once again,...looking at a grand total of 3 years out of 135 ,...does NOT make NOAA's grand proclamation very creditable,...!!!

FAST

Sorry but which site are you talking about? I'm pretty sure that the NOAA, NASA, and many others have constantly updated information.

 

[FAST]

Sorry but which site are you talking about? I'm pretty sure that the NOAA, NASA, and many others have constantly updated information.

https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/summary-info

My point is,...records have been set since 1880,...but NOAA,...as per your link,...only shows records that were set within the last three years.

Records have been set at a regular intervals since 1880,...

Would add a lot of credibility,...if they included the ability to display records set prior to 2012 in that link,...not just the last 3 years out of 135..

FAST

 

[basketcase]

https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/summary-info

My point is,...records have been set since 1880,...but NOAA,...as per your link,...only shows records that were set within the last three years.

Records have been set at a regular intervals since 1880,...

Would add a lot of credibility,...if they included the ability to display records set prior to 2012 in that link,...not just the last 3 years out of 135..

FAST

As much as it pains me, I have to agree with groggy that your argument is plain stupid.

Yes records were set over the years. The problem with your logic(?) is that those records have been blown away in the past decade. Therefore something that was a record high in 1970 is well below the current records.

And no matter what you want to claim, the NOAA, NASA, and the rest all provide easy access to temperature measurements for the past 100+ years. In the other threads M-F even was so kind as to post one set of the data so you can easily compare the current record highs to the previous records.


p.s. I did notice that in the link YOU posted, they use the word SUMMARY in the title and in fact it does go into detail about how 2015 compared to the 20th century averages. The full report is also linked at the bottom of the page. Any lack of credibility lays purely in your hands.

 

[FAST]

As much as it pains me, I have to agree with groggy that your argument is plain stupid.

Yes records were set over the years. The problem with your logic(?) is that those records have been blown away in the past decade. Therefore something that was a record high in 1970 is well below the current records.

And no matter what you want to claim, the NOAA, NASA, and the rest all provide easy access to temperature measurements for the past 100+ years. In the other threads M-F even was so kind as to post one set of the data so you can easily compare the current record highs to the previous records.


p.s. I did notice that in the link YOU posted, they use the word SUMMARY in the title and in fact it does go into detail about how 2015 compared to the 20th century averages. The full report is also linked at the bottom of the page. Any lack of credibility lays purely in your hands.

Come on basketcase,...you are better than this.

I have stated many times that the globe's temp. has been steadily rising since 1880,...as per a NASA graph,... on this we can agree.

That means it was higher in 1920, than it was in 1880, and was higher still in 1947.

For it to be higher in 1947 than 1880,...RECORDS MUST HAVE BEEN SET IN 1947,...

So setting higher temp. records,...IS NOTHING NEW,...is it,...been going on for 100's of years.

About the link,...its your link,...not my fault that NOAA's idea of a summary,... is 3 years out of 135 years,...doesn't want the public to see that high temp. records have been set regularly for over 100 years.

FAST

 

[Frankfooter]

Come on basketcase,...you are better than this.

I have stated many times that the globe's temp. has been steadily rising since 1880,...as per a NASA graph,... on this we can agree.

FAST

So you admit the hockey stick graph is correct.
Thanks.

 

[FAST]

So you admit the hockey stick graph is correct.
Thanks.

And yet another lie,...keep it up.

Thanks,...FAST

 

[Moviefan-2]

So you admit the hockey stick graph is correct.
Thanks.

LMFAO :biggrin1:

 

[Frankfooter]

And yet another lie,...keep it up.

Thanks,...FAST

You said:

the globe's temp. has been steadily rising since 1880,.

That confirms the findings of the hockey stick graph.
Thanks for playing.

 

[FAST]

You said:


That confirms the findings of the hockey stick graph.
Thanks for playing.

If your only source for displaying the earths continual temp. rise for the last 135 years,... is a graph universally accepted to be BULL SHIT,...

Explains why you are so out of touch on the subject.

Thanks for losing your little game,...AGAIN.

FAST

 

[Moviefan-2]

That confirms the findings of the hockey stick graph.

What horseshit.

The fact that the Earth's temperature as we approached the end of the 20th century was a little bit higher than the temperature in 1880 isn't news and was well-known long before Michael Mann made his way into graduate school.

The key "finding" of the hockey stick graph was the extremely dubious claim that there was no Medieval Warm Period. FAST said nothing to suggest he believes such a thing, and the hockey stick graph and Mann have been thoroughly discredited.

 

[Frankfooter]

What horseshit.

The fact that the Earth's temperature as we approached the end of the 20th century was a little bit higher than the temperature in 1880 isn't news and was well-known long before Michael Mann made his way into graduate school.

The key "finding" of the hockey stick graph was the extremely dubious claim that there was no Medieval Warm Period. FAST said nothing to suggest he believes such a thing, and the hockey stick graph and Mann have been thoroughly discredited.

I enjoy the fact that you copied a graph from an article that shows that the graph is nonsense.
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2007/05/the-weirdest-millennium/

Your link was:
(http://www.) realclimate.org/images/ipcc_1990_panel3.jpg


You really are entertaining.
Your 'proof' came from from an article that totally contradicts the charts and your claims.
What a fool you are.

 

[nervcity]

Its a hypothesis called abrupt climate change; there is strong evidence that it has happened in the past, which formed the basis for the idea in the movie. Most of the actual science was pretty hokey, but the idea that climate can change abruptly is legit.

 

[Moviefan-2]

I enjoy the fact that you copied a graph from an article that shows that the graph is nonsense.
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2007/05/the-weirdest-millennium/

Who cares what your link says.

The point is the graph from the IPCC's first report in 1990 confirms that the little change in temperature from 1880 to the end of the 20th century was a documented fact well before the hockey stick graph was ever created.

Your claim that FAST's statement was an endorsement of the "findings" in the hockey stick graph was total bullshit. Be an adult for once in your life and admit it.

 

[Frankfooter]

Who cares what your link says.

Its your link.

I checked the source of your 'chart' and it comes from an article that shows how the chart is faked, distorted, then used for lying arguments.
You are such an easy mark, you never even check to see if what you are posting is pure bullshit.

 

[Moviefan-2]

Its your link.

I checked the source of your 'chart' and it comes from an article that shows how the chart is faked, distorted, then used for lying arguments.
You are such an easy mark, you never even check to see if what you are posting is pure bullshit.

More pointless evasions.

I don't give a damn about where the link came from or what the web posting says about the IPCC's 1990 chart.

The fact is that your statement about FAST was false. You should try acting like an adult and acknowledge that what you said was wrong. Maybe you even want to show that you're more mature than anyone imagines and apologize to FAST.

 

[FAST]

You said:


That confirms the findings of the hockey stick graph.
Thanks for playing.

The graph that a US government study has found to be a lie,...you mean that graph.

Just how the hell does the fact that the earths temp. has been rising NATURALLY,...at an infinitesimal amount for at least 150 years,...confirm a discredited graph,...???

A little help for ya,... A graph is used to display data in a form that allows easy comparison of the entered data,...and is only as accurate as the data that was entered.

A lie is,...oh,...I don't need to explain that to you,...do I,...

FAST

 

[Moviefan-2]

A graph is used to display data in a form that allows easy comparison of the entered data,...and is only as accurate as the data that was entered.

This is still the definitive video on Mann's work.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fAlMomLvu_4

 

[bishop]

Its your link.

I checked the source of your 'chart' and it comes from an article that shows how the chart is faked, distorted, then used for lying arguments.
You are such an easy mark, you never even check to see if what you are posting is pure bullshit.

A cursory read of the link shows that the graph posted is not wrong, the article speaks of another graph that used the posted graph as the framework to make a fake graph.

Instead of spending 5 minutes to read an article, you would rather spend that 5 minutes making a post that reveals you ignorance, incompetence, and laziness.

Alternatively you might actually have read the article and understood what it says and chose to still make false statements, in that case your post is a testament to your commitment to deception, and not a smart deception at that as anyone who has 5 minutes to read the article can see right through your deception.