Prince Charles Calls Climate Deniers "Headless Chicken Brigade"

L Gilbert

Winterized
Nov 30, 2006
23,738
107
63
71
50 acres in Kootenays BC
the-brights.net
Prince Charles cheated on Princess Diana. How smart could he be?

It is not so much that he cheated, it is what he cheated with.
lol Exactly.

You guys should read up on his dad and what he thinks should be done about you peasants.
Hey, Prince Phlip is a howl n a half. Leave him be. :D

Yes, some people even still refuse to accept that the Earth isn't flat, despite the evidence to the contrary. Those photos from space must be faked? Deniers are people who are so obtuse as to be impervious to evidence and reasoning.

Yeah. Those people are even weirder, just about, than the Warmists.
Really? You finally accepted that Earth is ovoid and not flat? Well, congrats, Blacklaff! Party on, dude!
 

coldstream

on dbl secret probation
Oct 19, 2005
5,160
27
48
Chillliwack, BC
Sounds like Charles has been talking to his potted plants again... the source of his most profound revelations.

It's what becomes of a family from generations of marrying first cousins.. which is why they were so desperate to bring some commoners into the Royal line.
 
Last edited:

L Gilbert

Winterized
Nov 30, 2006
23,738
107
63
71
50 acres in Kootenays BC
the-brights.net
The difference between a hill and a mountain is entirely subjective and usually quite localized. To me, a mountain is a prominence that has a treeline as above a certain altitude, trees won't grow. If a prominence has trees on its summit, it's a hill or in case of terrain that has no trees anywhere (like the M.E.) mountains are higher than about 4100 meters above sealevel.
 

JLM

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 27, 2008
75,301
547
113
Vernon, B.C.
The difference between a hill and a mountain is entirely subjective and usually quite localized. To me, a mountain is a prominence that has a treeline as above a certain altitude, trees won't grow. If a prominence has trees on its summit, it's a hill or in case of terrain that has no trees anywhere (like the M.E.) mountains are higher than about 4100 meters above sealevel.

Hills are rounded on top, mountains are pointed. -:)
 

coldstream

on dbl secret probation
Oct 19, 2005
5,160
27
48
Chillliwack, BC
I once heard the NFL described as the Diana of pro-football.. all glamour, proper posture and air (head).. the CFL as the Camilla.. ugly, unkempt, and earthy.. but a hell of a ride in comparison.. a lady's prancing horse versus and a bucking bronco. :)
 
Last edited:

Tonington

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 27, 2006
15,441
150
63
It is marked up in 0.5 degree units as detailed in the product specifications above.
You can read this thermometer to an accuracy of 0.25 degrees Celsius; that is if the mercury doesn’t line up with a mark but sits between 2 of them, then the best you could read off would be, say, 0.25 degrees Celsius.
If you represented each year with a glass of water whose water temperature matched the temperature anomaly in the table and then used the thermometer above to measure the temperature, you would not be able to read any differences between the 10 glasses of water.

Why would anyone think of reading a global average from a single thermometer as a useful exercise at all...the above is a fundamental ignorance of scientific terms. The thermometer is accurate to 0.05°C it's even stated explicitly in the screen shot of the thermometer... the accuracy is not 0.25°C. I agree that it would be hard to see an annual global average temperature anomaly on a thermometer which has such poor precision. But consider that the satellites which measure an analog of surface temperature to a much higher degree of precision than 0.25°C, only differ from the thermometer based surface temperature records by about 0.03°C/decade when estimating the global temperature trend. The resolution of UAH and RSS satellite reported temperatures is 0.001°C. That's a pretty good confirmation, and honestly who really cares if 2005 was 0.01°C cooler than 2010. The only people who seem to care about measuring from peaks instead of over entire records are the ones who think that a flat global air temperature record is evidence of a stall in global warming, despite clear evidence that the planet continues to accumulate heat (90% in the oceans) which should be expected given that there is still a measured imbalance (ranging between +0.5 to 1.0 W/m^2) of energy in and energy out at the top of the atmosphere....
 

darkbeaver

the universe is electric
Jan 26, 2006
41,035
201
63
RR1 Distopia 666 Discordia
Why would anyone think of reading a global average from a single thermometer as a useful exercise at all...the above is a fundamental ignorance of scientific terms. The thermometer is accurate to 0.05°C it's even stated explicitly in the screen shot of the thermometer... the accuracy is not 0.25°C. I agree that it would be hard to see an annual global average temperature anomaly on a thermometer which has such poor precision. But consider that the satellites which measure an analog of surface temperature to a much higher degree of precision than 0.25°C, only differ from the thermometer based surface temperature records by about 0.03°C/decade when estimating the global temperature trend. The resolution of UAH and RSS satellite reported temperatures is 0.001°C. That's a pretty good confirmation, and honestly who really cares if 2005 was 0.01°C cooler than 2010. The only people who seem to care about measuring from peaks instead of over entire records are the ones who think that a flat global air temperature record is evidence of a stall in global warming, despite clear evidence that the planet continues to accumulate heat (90% in the oceans) which should be expected given that there is still a measured imbalance (ranging between +0.5 to 1.0 W/m^2) of energy in and energy out at the top of the atmosphere....

If you had clear evidence you would have played it first and avoided the blather about thermometers.
 

darkbeaver

the universe is electric
Jan 26, 2006
41,035
201
63
RR1 Distopia 666 Discordia
Of course Kevin Trenbeth received some notoriety with his
“The fact is that we can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can’t”.
statement.
Except that Trenberth was quite correct – they indeed can’t explain it, but he was also correct in deducing that the missing heat is in the oceans, but not in the form as mainstream science understands it at present, thermal energy or stored heat.