yeah, take away all the lines except measured temperature and what do you get? That's right Walter, global warming. Not cooling. Even by your own graph. Man, I hate it when a good plan backfires, don't you?
New Study Is A ‘Death Blow’ To Global Warming Hysteria
- Thread starter Locutus
- Start date
yeah, take away all the lines except measured temperature and what do you get? That's right Walter, global warming. Not cooling. Even by your own graph. Man, I hate it when a good plan backfires, don't you?
Oh, I thought he was referring to the adjustments from the scaaaaaaary scientists.
Their coming for your family.
(BE SCARED)
Oh, so many classic denier responses, it's hard to keep up.
"It's getting cooler."
"We actually here is teh measured temperatures. It looks like it's getting warmer."
"Well [huffily] Not by much."
Just change your facts to whatever suits that day. Tomorrow you'll be back to global cooling again. The thing is the denier camp is so insulated you don't realize how ridiculous it looks from the outside.
The ultimate question asked, that you once again ignored, is why should we believe these new predictions of doom and gloom when previous predictions did not pan out.
And it's still getting warmer even after 5 pages of arguing about it. And now the graph the deniers hate.
100 years is not long enough a time span to accurately predict squat when it comes to global climates. Show a graph that has global temps for the last 1000, or 2000 years at least. Prove that the existing warming is not just a natural phase in the global climate. Putting up these short time frame graphs may be enough to scare the bejesus out of the rank and file, but it is not showing enough of a trend for those of us that have a little more brain matter between the ears. These short time graphs are only showing us what the warmest scientists want us to see. Personally, I want to see the whole picture, not a small snap shot.
Poor Waldo....P-iss and moan about the people at CC....yet he keeps coming back, lost all credibility because of a statement he couldn't back, and in true bullsh*ter fashion he tried to evade and deflect
P*iss and moan p*ss and moan...
P*iss and moan p*ss and moan...
2000 is even better.....
Wonder why they made that a faint dotted line at the end? D'oh! What a giveaway! Also the anomaly is around 0.75 right for 2014 I think, not 0.4.
"More brain matter between your ears"? Here's the collective view of world's scientists, the vast majority of whom believe that anthropogenic CO2 is causing an increase in tropospheric global average temperatures, and your conclusion is that they're all dummies compared to you, random dude in the internet. :lol:
Yes, it will at some point I imagine.
You do not seem to understand that those of us who resist and resent the BS about globull warming are that way because we have been bullchitted for many years. We do not argue against the warming, just the hands out for a grant groups who want to blame people for a natural happening.
Ask the IPCC it's their doing.
.
Does the earth have a habit of warming and cooling during Interglacials?
97% of 32.5% .......
But you do argue against the warming. That's why you are always going on about the antarctic ice (I think the sea ice around antarctica is growing to record proportions) or have threads about global cooling, or go on and on about NASA fudged numbers whenever presented with any evidence of warming.
otherwise these threads would have people saying "Sure it's warming but it's natural." But if you read through it, most of the deniers deny any warming whatsoever.
No this is put together by the NPCC Nongervnemtnal Panel on Claimte Change or something. That's the website you got it from.
Regardless when looking at the previous 17 interglacials the same!ething happens with or without man. Warm cycles and cool cycles both starting and stopping sharply. In the end such as we are into or interglacial, it makes far more sense to expect a rapid drop in temperature than a spike.
Almost a Heinrick type thing happen to the gulf stream right now.....
Brrrrr....
Almost a Heinrick type thing happen to the gulf stream right now.....
Brrrrr....
Show me where I said that. Haven't ever said that. I also see you couldn't, or wouldn't, answer the one question I posed. Why is that? Why is it that neither you or wally wingnut are willing to answer the one question I have posed?
You see, you're not doing your claims of hyper-intelligence any good when you can't even remember back one post. :lol:
I also see you couldn't, or wouldn't, answer the one question I posed. Why is that? Why is it that neither you or wally wingnut are willing to answer the one question I have posed?[/QUOTE]
I think the reason is that the question was some five pages ago, followed by five pages of you demanding that waldo answer your question.
Global warming is primarily cured by anthropogenic emissions of CO2 to the atmosphere. It will increase at a rate of about 1 deg C per doubling of CO2, with exaggerated effects in polar areas. It will be bad and expensive, but probably more of a nuisance than an existential threat. Personally, I'm more worried about the fish. That's my prediction.
sigh, you put yourself out there as being of above average intelligence, yet you use simplistic arguments by changing what's been said and if you didn't do it on purpose, then your intelligence isn't as high as you claim. Here's what I wrote, in it's entirety with the pertinent info highlighted.
As you SHOULD be able to see, I referred to the rank and file as a comparison, NOT the scientists.
Really, you think, do you. Obviously you are having problems with that process. As you can see above, where I re quoted what I had said, I asked the question right there. You chose to quote part of what I said AND twist, intentionally or not, what it was I said.
But that is NOT what the majority are stating. Not entirely at least. Predictions are of global catastrophe if we don't start dumping money, hand over fist, into stopping the CO2 emissions.
well look at that. You and I agree on something. I really can't see where I could argue with you on the above.