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.
No matter how cold it gets, the warmists still come out and proclaim that the current or just finished year is "the warmest ever."
What a bunch of habitual liars.
Do not trust the AGW alarmists. They have been caught repeatedly cooking the books on this.
Remember Climate-gate, Hockey-stick gate, Climate-gate II and the most recent South American data manipulation fiasco, just to name a few.
So you want people to 'trust' the easily debunked evidence-free false claims of conspiracy theorists who post on nutty internet blogs and tabloid press opinion pieces by hack journalists aimed at increasing advertising revenue, instead of evidence-based science?
The scientists supporting the government funded AGW alarmism movement have been caught cooking the books, yet again:
Apparently the temperature data in South America, Canada and Siberia regions have been methodically adjusted by the scientists supporting the AGW alarmism movement. Of course those adjustments have all gone in the same direction, which is upwards. This seriously undermines the legitimacy of this data as a basis for claims in recent years that the Earth has been warmer than it has seemed to many people looking on from the outside.
This is a true rejection of science at its worst. If these people were trustworthy, then why would they not be able to simply use the accurate data and let the results be what they may? Obviously, because that would not support their alarmist agenda.
How many times do these blatantly false evidence-free claims have to be discredited by the facts before you stop posting this crap? You are the one 'rejecting science' in favor of ignorant ridiculous conspiracy theories.
Here's a video by Kevin Cowtan showing how to look at the raw and adjusted data from
several sources including the independent Berkeley Earth datasets.
It provides links to the sources and online tools as well.
So you want people to 'trust' the easily debunked evidence-free false claims of conspiracy theorists who post on nutty internet blogs and tabloid press opinion pieces by hack journalists aimed at increasing advertising revenue, instead of evidence-based science?
From the Merriam Websters dictionary:
Quote:
conspiracy noun con·spir·a·cy \kən-ˈspir-ə-sē\ : a secret plan made by two or more people to do something that is harmful or illegal
How often do you believe that humans work together towards an end that they do not want others to know about, that is arguably harmful to someone in some way? Is it:
A. Constantly and in large numbers (More than a thousand groups of people conspiring at any one time)
B. Frequently, but in not very large numbers (Less than a thousand groups of people conspiring at any one time)
C. Occasionally, with significant gaps of time existing when there are NO conspiracies occurring anywhere on the planet Earth.
D. Never
{Hint: The Answer is A. People do this all this time}
If you answer evasively or defensively, that will be received as the selection of the correct answer, which is A. I know how much you like to engage in deflection, denial and name calling.
Prove me wrong and give a straight answer, for a change.
From the Merriam Websters dictionary:
How often do you believe that humans work together towards an end that they do not want others to know about, that is arguably harmful to someone in some way? Is it:
A. Constantly and in large numbers (More than a thousand groups of people conspiring at any one time)
B. Frequently, but in not very large numbers (Less than a thousand groups of people conspiring at any one time)
C. Occasionally, with significant gaps of time existing when there are NO conspiracies occurring anywhere on the planet Earth.
D. Never
{Hint: The Answer is A. People do this all this time}
If you answer evasively or defensively, that will be received as the selection of the correct answer, which is A. I know how much you like to engage in deflection, denial and name calling.
Prove me wrong and give a straight answer, for a change.
I'm not playing your game and following you down your ridiculous rabbit hole. You can play with yourself.
8 inches of snow and record low temps here in SE Pa. But next week we'll get back to normal temps, finally. I hope these brutal winters and low temperatures aren't a trend, but its beginning to look that way. Oh, well, we can use another summer without a heat wave.
I don't know what your point is.
The planet has been warming for quite some time now, and this year is simply part of that trend.
Climate normals aren't determined by looking at a single year.
Yep.
The Earth has warmed since the end of the "little ice age" which lasted from about 1350 to 1850, a time during which glaciers advanced, crop failures increased, deaths from epidemics and plague were common and Washington crossed an ice-choked Delaware river. So, we were due for an upturn and we have gotten it.
Prior to that, we had the medieval warming period, which lasted from 800 to about 1300. This was when the Vikings were the terror of Europe and Greenland was actually green.
So as you can see, the warming we have experienced since the end of the little ice-age is not unusual or unexpected at all.
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.
