There has been no observed warming in the 21st century until 2015 due to quite possibly the strongest El Nino on record. http://www.thegwpf.org/
The new official climate change thread
- Thread starter K Douglas
- Start date
The comparisons you make here are completely absurd. The real deniers are the cadre of climatistas who are slowly starting to realize their gig is about to end.
What, you mean over 4000 climatologists/scientists aren't required to track the earths CO2 and temps, and run computer simulations.
I mean that's only 40 climatologists/scientists per country.
Shit, why bother with remote wireless data reading, satellite data gathering, we could have them in HOT AIR balloons, love that analogy, and one at each remote sensor site.
But I don't think many of the over 4000 of them would be interested in leaving their air conditioned offices, which is kinda funny, when IPCC/UN wants air conditioning gone.
But we are talking about a special club here.
FAST
It is what they are insisting must be done which is the alarming issue
Replace 100% of fossil fuels with renewables ??
The UNemployable's Club,...
But much easier to sit behind a desk and proclaim what is wrong, than actually working on a solution, because then you would have to produce something other than computer generated guesstimates.
They way they have it now, just hoping their gig just continues long enough to retire ,while flying from one seance to another, polluting the environment.
FAST
Would make much more sense for all 4000 of these self proclaimed "experts" on everything, to actually work on developing something, like "WORKABLE" replacements for fossil fuels.
But much easier to sit behind a desk and proclaim what is wrong, than actually working on a solution, because then you would have to produce something other than computer generated guesstimates.
They way they have it now, just hoping their gig just continues long enough to retire ,while flying from one seance to another, polluting the environment.
FAST
Last edited:
Very true.
And he makes it worse by creating imaginary quotes that he attributes to me to support his fairy-tale claim that I "backed down" from my assertion that the NOAA cooked the books.
If there is any doubt, let me restate my position: The NOAA cooked the books to create its false claim that there was no slowdown.
I'm confident that "sane people here" will agree that my position remains firm.
Then why does the study you posted show only 9% of scientists agree with you?
http://www.pbl.nl/sites/default/fil...ence-survey-questions-and-responses_01731.pdf
The quick answer would be because many of them don't know the data.
http://business.financialpost.com/f...ensus-among-the-misinformed-is-not-worth-much
However, that study you're citing was done in 2012. It's more than a little difficult to imagine the respondents were commenting on a graph that was only published two months ago. :biggrin1:
(By the way, that published paper that the graph came from wasn't written by me.)
Unless the study also includes what umbrella organization each scientist is associated with, meaningless.
If, for example, the 91% are with NOAA, IPCC and NASA, and the 9% are independent, then the 9% actually outweigh the 91%, who are with only THREE organizations.
FAST
Last edited:
The "most recent data" is due to the El Nino weather phenomenon. Surely, you know that weather and climate aren't the same thing.
If you want to look at the IPCC's total history, its predictions go back to 1990. That's the furthest you can go back to test the predictions.
According to the graph, there were eight years since then where the temperature increased, and 16 years where the temperature was stagnant. The temperature was stagnant for twice as long as the period where there was a correlation between IPCC predictions and the Earth's temperature.
Furthermore, in the Climategate emails, Phil Jones of the University of East Anglia said 15 years was a sufficient amount of time to determine whether there was a problem with the models. The IPCC made per-decade predictions. No one ever said anything about "30 year rolling averages". Apparently, the criteria for falsifying the hypothesis is rather fluid. :beguiled:
One final point -- the Earth has been warming for hundreds of years. You don't test the AGW hypothesis by looking to see if you can find any time period where you can show a slight bit of warming.
You test the AGW hypothesis by comparing the predictions with observed data. The predictions have been consistently and spectacularly wrong (and that remains true to this day).
http://www.scientificamerican.com/sciam/assets/Image/image_asset_11015.jpg
Go ahead and post the thirty year rolling averages.
And yes, thirty years is the definition of climate. Weather is anything less. Thirty years is long enough to average multiple El Ninos or other effects you use as excuses. Moreover it is the timeframe suggested by Conway who we are explicitly debunking in this discussion: you are responding to my assertion that Conway's prediction has been proven wrong and in the Conway video we are discussing he explicitly references the 30 year definition of climate.
Ah yes.
http://www.theguardian.com/environm...skeptics-psychology-study-conspiracy-theories
Back to the vague conspiracy theory talk again, eh?
Just like moviefan and his allegations that NOAA committed fraud just to make the pause disappear.
https://weather.com/news/climate/news/record-warmest-april-earth-2016
http://www.theguardian.com/environm...record-for-hottest-year-final-figures-confirm
El Nino can't account for 15 of the 16 warmest years happening since 2001.
Your claim is spectacularly wrong.
Ah, using an opinion piece by Ross McKitrick, an economist, as evidence?
Really shows you can't tell a legit source from right wing conspiracy, doesn't it?
Back to the fraud allegations.
Which puts you firmly in the conspiracy theory camp.
Thanks, clears that up.
I believe real scientists who don't have an agenda. Scientists like Dr Roy Spencer at UAH. The satellite record 6.0 is now showing a warming trend of 0.114C per decade from Dec '78 to Mar '15, down from 0.140C. Does that sound like a warming trend to you?
