Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Where exactly did that Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming go?
So the IPCC has been telling us that the earth has warmed drastically over the last 100 or so years. In fact it has been reported that the warming is around 0.8C which (gasp) is just awful… Mostly because it has not lead to things like more flooding and more tornadoes and more hurricanes etc….
Now a new peer reviewed scientific paper reports that the methods scientists use to homogenize the data is wrong and about half the warming being reported is in fact an error.
So over the last 100 years, it is more likely that the earth has warmed by about 0.42C. Not exactly earth shaking numbers…
Drought of 2012 worst in decades | WOOD TV8 HOLLAND, Mich. (WOOD) - The nation's widest drought in decades is spreading, with more than half of the continental United States now in some stage of drought and most of the rest enduring abnormally dry conditions.
Only in the 1930s and the 1950s has a drought covered more land, according to federal figures released Monday.
Drought of 2012 worst in decades | WOOD TV8 HOLLAND, Mich. (WOOD) - The nation's widest drought in decades is spreading, with more than half of the continental United States now in some stage of drought and most of the rest enduring abnormally dry conditions.
Only in the 1930s and the 1950s has a drought covered more land, according to federal figures released Monday.
Hmmmm.... you just confirmed that this is not the worst drought in history... not even the worst in the past century.
Thanks.
And by the way, Austin Texas just had the most rainy July in years...... and the month is not yet over.
LOL! Thats all you have? Half the warming has vanished and you want to talk about a very poor report (not peer reviewed by the way) that includes some very shoddy math?
Here is a nice review of the NOAA scientists approach.
Hmmmm.... you just confirmed that this is not the worst drought in history... not even the worst in the past century.
Thanks.
And by the way, Austin Texas just had the most rainy July in years...... and the month is not yet over.
in fact the droughts in both the 30s and the 50s was far worse....
but in CAGW news there is some outfit that came up with a new methodology to study droughts. they found the recent one to be the worst in the whole history of their data....which is about 12 years old.
What they didn't say in their statment was what was in the report which showed that their reports were junk as this article points out. They were peer reviewed but they didn't take into consideration to any issues brought up by those peers. lol
The "recommendations" issued by the IAC were not minor adjustments to a fundamentally sound scientific procedure. Here are some of the findings of the IAC's 2010 report.
The IAC reported that IPCC lead authors fail to give "due consideration ... to properly documented alternative views" (p. 20), fail to "provide detailed written responses to the most significant review issues identified by the Review Editors" (p. 21), and are not "consider[ing] review comments carefully and document[ing] their responses" (p. 22). In plain English: the IPCC reports are not peer-reviewed.
The IAC found that "the IPCC has no formal process or criteria for selecting authors" and "the selection criteria seemed arbitrary to many respondents" (p. 18). Government officials appoint scientists from their countries and "do not always nominate the best scientists from among those who volunteer, either because they do not know who these scientists are or because political considerations are given more weight than scientific qualifications" (p. 18). In other words: authors are selected from a "club" of scientists and nonscientists who agree with the alarmist perspective favored by politicians.
The egocentric aspect was a bit too much to swallow, so the human caused part is intentionally omitted. the strategy remains the same. Global distribution of wealth....to some more than others.
Consider the proponents said we can not change what is about to happen.....oops, cat out of the bag.
Hey the science is settled, we're all dead meat.
Hey what do you feel like doing with your last few days?
Lots of science from NewsBusters IIRC.
You're saying that there's no climate change?
That's right, you live in the US, they don't have climate change.
The rest of the world seems to notice it though.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
