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.
Uh, actually, given that the cardboard sign people have said that the climate scientists are wrong, they have a better track record with their predictions than the climate scientists. I mean, if we're being accurate.
Uh, actually, given that the cardboard sign people have said that the climate scientists are wrong, they have a better track record with their predictions than the climate scientists. I mean, if we're being accurate.
There is a lot of errors in talking about "GLOBAL WARMING", the average temperature of the planet MAY go up but that does NOT mean everyone is warmer.
Some some climate change means warmer, some colder, for some more rain, some less, storms may get less frequent but more extreme, this isn't a year by year process, you need to take it out many hundreds even thousands of years.
Locally the last few years we had very mind winters, THIS year made up for it.
The Great Lakes were MORE ice covered than in many years.
There is a LOT involved, the icepacks melt thinning the oceans of salinity, that changes the heat transfer from the equator to the poles ....
The Pacific gets warmer and changes the weather patterns for the west coast .. etc. etc. etc.
The ONLY thing that is open for debate is how much of this is affected by Human activity .. Personally, I think very little on a GLOBAL scale. (sound strange coming from a Liberal?)
What was the status of Human activity 10-15,000 years ago when the last Ice Age ended?
It's the reason Humans were able to migrate from Siberia to North America.
They have exactly the same track record with their predictions. Which demonstrates that Global Warming is obviously a religion to you, and not science. Only those who believe in a religion can believe in "doom & gloom" predictions that are always wrong. The religious nut standing on a street corner with a sign that reads "repent for the end of the world is nigh" is an exact representation of what Global Warming religious fanatics have become, and they are just as credible.
Is that the depth of your reasoning? that all the scientists and all the people who believe what they say are no more credible than a religious extremist on a street corner with a sign saying the end is nigh.?
Of course it makes sense. The temperature has not increased each and every year. There have been some years where the mean surface temperature has dropped. Between 1880 and 2011 NASA's GISS reported a total overall increase in mean surface temperature of 0.85°C, and a total over decrease in mean surface temperature of 0.34°C. Resulting in a net increase in surface temperature of 0.51°C over the last 131 years.
They are not "anomalies" they are changes in the mean surface temperature from the previous year. NASA's GISS data is from 1880 to 2011. Sometimes the mean surface temperature increases, sometimes it decreases. Overall, however, there has been a net increase of 0.51°C over the last 131 years.
See above. The graph is the difference in the mean temperature from year to year. You can also download the raw data from NASA, which does include the specific temperature from over 300 different locations. However, the purpose of the graph is to show the change in the mean temperature, and you can divide 0.51°C by 13.1 to determine the average increase/decrease in temperature per decade. That is precisely what the IPCC AR5 report does, only they are using bogus data that did not originate with NASA, despite their claims to the contrary. Using the IPCC bogus data, temperatures would have had to increase by 1.24°C over the last 131 years. NASA says the mean surface temperature was 2.4 times lower than what the IPCC AR5 is reporting.
The IPCC is flat out lying. I am posting both sources, which they will not do. If you believe NASA's data, then you cannot believe the IPCC. If you believe the IPCC, then you cannot believe NASA. You cannot have it both ways. Since the data varies by more than 2.4 times, one or the other has to be deliberately lying.
Since when is a change in temperature an "anomaly?" Apparently you do not have a clue what "anomaly" means.
anomaly:
the angular distance of a planet from its perihelion as seen from the sun
deviation from the common rule : irregularity
something anomalous : something different, abnormal, peculiar, or not easily classified
Just because the temperature changes does not make it an aberrant or an anomalous event. In fact, if the temperature did not change, then that would be an anomaly.
The IPCC AR5 report deliberately misrepresents the data they cite in order to push their government control and wealth distribution scam. Since they cannot accurately represent the data NASA has provided, then all of the data they cite is suspect.
The fact that Global Warming Alarmists cannot be honest proves beyond any doubt that AGW is nothing more than a complete scam.
Nope. It's you who does not understand what temperature anomaly means, or how to read that graph. This is basic stuff. Try reading the links I provided. You don't even appear to be aware that GISS uses a 30 year base period from 1951 to 1980.
Yeah yeah, everyone else is lying and only you have found the magic smoking gun.
Is that the depth of your reasoning? that all the scientists and all the people who believe what they say are no more credible than a religious extremist on a street corner with a sign saying the end is nigh.?
Did I say scientists? The scientists are doing their jobs, recording accurate observations. It is the liberal freak politicians who then twist that data to suit their own political agenda. Like I said, I have no problem with NASA's GISS data, but nothing published by the UN or anything that comes out of Obama's gob can be believed.
If you want to know what is really happening, follow the science not the politicians. Of course if you wanted to know what was really happening you would not be a proud supporter of habitual liars. Hence, one can only conclude that you want to be a mushroom (kept in the dark and fed lots of guano).
Quote:
Originally Posted by jambo101
Do you believe the Earth is flat? if not why not?
Of course the Earth is spherical. The Greek, Eratosthenes of Cyrene calculated Earth's circumference around 240 BC. Do you still believe that you can kept your health care insurance and your doctor if you like them? If not, why not?
Nope. It's you who does not understand what temperature anomaly means, or how to read that graph. This is basic stuff. Try reading the links I provided. You don't even appear to be aware that GISS uses a 30 year base period from 1951 to 1980.
Yeah yeah, everyone else is lying and only you have found the magic smoking gun.
Actually, the NASA GISS raw data extends back to 1880 in most cases. Some of the temperature data did not exist for certain locations, and other data was missing. For example the raw data from both NASA and NOAA for Anchorage, AK (one of the more than 300 locations used) only extends back to 1916, and is missing temperature data for some months before 1925.
Hansen, before he retired from NASA, specifically chose the last global cooling cycle to over-emphasize the amount of change since 1980. A common, yet fraudulent statistical trick. If you actually look at all of the raw data collected by the NASA GIS Survey there were actually two cooling cycles and two warming cycles since 1880. From 1880 to 1915 the mean surface temperature of the planet was getting cooler. From 1915 to 1945 the mean surface temperature of the planet was getting warmer. From 1945 to 1980 the mean surface temperature of the planet was getting cooler. From 1980 to 2010 mean surface temperature of the planet was getting warmer. During the cooling cycles the total mean surface temperature dropped by 0.34°C. During the warming cycles the total mean surface temperature increased by 0.85°C. Resulting in a net increase in the mean surface temperature of 0.51°C since 1880.
You STILL don't get that graph? You still don't get that GISS use a 30 year base period from 1951-1980 or what that even means? You still don't get the idea of using temperature anomalies and not absolute temperatures? Seriously? This basic stuff.
Please. Go read those links I posted about temperature anomalies relative to the base period. It's not rocket science.
Of course the Earth is spherical. The Greek, Eratosthenes of Cyrene calculated Earth's circumference around 240 BC. Do you still believe that you can kept your health care insurance and your doctor if you like them? If not, why not?
You say that with such conviction! It could all be a scientific conspiracy perpetrated on a gullible public, what evidence can you provide that the Earth isnt flat with out me calling it all lies benefiting some secret society. Personally i think your whole anti GW agenda has much to do with your hatred of your President.
The keep your healthcare statement was said in the assumption that you actually had a healthcare plan to keep and not some junk plan that just took your money every month with no intention of ever paying if you ever needed it,The issue is kinda like a blessing in disguise IMO.
As far as my healthcare goes? i've got it for life, no insurance agents, no loopholes no deductibles..
PS, looks flat to me.
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.
