According to NOAA scientists, 2010 tied with 2005 as the warmest year of the global surface temperature record, beginning in 1880. This was the 34th ...
NASA - NASA Finds 2011 Ninth Warmest Year on Record
The difference between 2011 and the warmest year in the GISS record (2010) is 0.22 degrees F (0.12 C).
After initializing and parameterizing hundreds of unknown factors, inserting divergent proxy data and ignoring any difficult natural forcing factors, we ran hundreds of simulations until we obtained the results we wanted–an ensemble of meaningless projected results, which we then averaged. We homogenized, adjusted and used the liberally unprincipled component method, and produced a new set of hockey sticks, giving a very robust prediction (>90% likelihood) that we are all being totally screwed
(Please read article before the denier with all the sock puppet accounts censors it)..
.
How the Dutch make 'room for the river' by redesigning downtown
.
For centuries, the Dutch have built higher and higher dikes to keep waters at bay in a country where 55 percent of housing is located in areas prone to flooding. But climate change has convinced them this approach will no longer work.
AP-An international team of scientists says it has figured out how to slow global warming: Stop focusing so much on carbon dioxide. They say the key is to reduce emissions of two powerful and fast-acting causes of global warming — methane and soot.
Two dozen scientists from around the world ran computer models of 400 different existing pollution control measures and came up with 14 methods that attack methane and soot.
Check out youtube.com/user/ta7king for a simple but scientific explanation. Watch all the videos, and then make up your mind! The video course is for school children, so it should be easy enough for anyone to understand B - )
You are a complete MORON. The climate has RISEN 0.7 degrees Celsius in the past 100 years. It is proven that the only thing that can change our average temperature over a long period of time is solar radiance, which has gone DOWN over the past 100 years, yet the planet's temperature has still RISEN over the past 100 years, and faster than it ever has in recorded history. 0.7 degrees is very significant when you consider the fact that the coldest ever ice age was only 5 degrees cooler than today.
It has risen 0.7c since 1850; last ice age was 9c cooler; rate of rise is not fast
The solar guys are not claiming irradiance.
The mechanism is magnetic effects and changes in the solar wind, causing less high-energy cosmic rays resulting in less low level cloud cover, and so a warmer Earth.
-It was warmer than now 1,000 years ago, 2,000 years ago, 3,400 years ago, 6,800 years ago, 7,800 years ago, 9,000 years ago, 125,000 years ago, 240,000, 325,000 ect.
@1000frolly Your statement is false. Btw, I got that information in school from my professor at Western Michigan University. He does research in global warming, and studies it extensively.
If your professor told you "It is proven that the only thing that can change our average temperature over a long period of time is solar radiance"
Then he is wrong. He obviously knows little about the solar magnetosphere, charged particles or the solar wind/heiliosphere. Solar irradiance went up sharply right through the 20th century.
Irradiance has only been falling since 2000.
What is NOT proven (or is even likely) is that CO2 is causing the current warming.
If your professor told you "It is proven that the only thing that can change our average temperature over a long period of time is solar radiance"
Then he is wrong. He obviously knows little about the solar magnetosphere, charged particles or the solar wind/heiliosphere. Solar irradiance went up sharply right through the 20th century.
Irradiance has only been falling since 2000.
What is NOT proven (or is even likely) is that CO2 is causing the current warming
@1000frolly Also, you misread my statement. I was saying that our planet is NOT warming because of solar irradiance. That was my entire argument. Solar irradiance (the only real natural long term climate changer) is going down, yet our planet's temperature is going up. However, you may be right about it rising 0.7 since 1850, instead of "over the past 100 years", but that's just a minor detail. He's saying in the vid that the temp has gone DOWN 0.7, which is completely wrong.
It's been said that the main problem is that there isn't enough to go around period. Americans are 5% of the world's population, yet use 23% of its energy. Now imagine if China and India, which are almost 1/3 of the world's population, demanded to live the same way as Americans...
Australia "0.7 DEGREES WARMER over past 50 years."
Australia's top science body said on Monday temperatures had risen about 0.7 degrees Celsius in the last 50 years, describing the finding as "significant evidence" of CLIMATE CHANGE.
Who invents this bull? I think you are talking about the CSIRO, a well-known IPCC support group. There is no truth to this.
As anyone in the field knows from all temperature records the southern hemisphere is warming at a much slower rate than the northern H.
Example; University of Alabama Huntsville shows a 0.2c warming, RSS shows 0.2c warming (satellite, since 1979), The further south you go, the less it is; Antarctica has had a 0.5c FALL (UAH)
Gore has done nothing but be correct about climate change and try to make the world a better place from what I can tell. He at least deserves thanks and not the oil industry troll sock puppets who trash him full time on the internet
Al Gore always keeps his promises, whichever he reaches first, a multi-billionaire or dead, he will then stop his polluting lifestyle, and divest himself of all of his mansions, jet and limo rides, heated swimming pools, consumption of the choicest cuts of dead cows, expensive murdered lobsters etc
it is about enslavement ,taxing everything we do even breathing!! like what william wilberforce said "give the slaves some money and then you don't call them slaves any more" well might not be in the same words but the meaning was the same!!!! but now they are taking it all back little by little!! we're slaves to Capitalism, Consumerism. Some PPl are playing a dangerous game of SIMS
The Global Warming experts told us no more snow and disappearing glaciers a few years ago. Now that we have growing glaciers and record breaking snow, they change their pied piper tunes from global warming to climate change
To see the truth that is driving these carboneer monkeys more crazy than they are
Growing glaciers due to Global Warming
Search "Glaciers growing in Spain" "12 More Glaciers that Have Not Heard The Newss About Global Warming" "Our Glaciers Are Growing Not Melting: More Falsehoods From Al Gore" "Perito Moreno The Politically Incorrect Glacier"
@DaveGibbagglers Why focus on one place? Are more glaciers growing or shrinking worldwide?
Answer: Shrinking and the shrinking is accelerating See: World Glacier Monitoring Service (WGMS) or Greene (2005) for why Dave's comment is misleading about glaciers globally.
The Global Warming experts told us no more snow and disappearing glaciers a few years ago. Now that we have growing glaciers and record breaking snow, they change their pied piper tunes from global warming to climate change. And now these global warming Talibans want to jihad me for exposing their dogma.
@PacificCircle1 You make a great point in stopping immigration from third world peoples to a first world culture, increase of Petro consumption. Do you have some more info we can use to stop immigration?
@PacificCircle1 Yes then the US needs to be left alone as the pollution is coming from China and India. Too bad Clinton and Gore pushed for the creation of the WTO and gave China MFN, and Permanent Normal Trade Relations, until they could push getting them into the WTO. Now almost all OF the US industry IS IN China with lax environmental regulations and then huge amounts of CO2 emitted to ship the crap back here. Thanks Al Gore and Bill Clinton, oooppppsssss
Erosion by climate change biggest threat to Sunderbans
.
The debate on the vulnerability of Sunderbans as one of the hot spots of climate change continues – experts have predicted that at least a "dozen islands on the South-western part of the mangrove swamps are likely to lose an average of 65 per cent of their land by 2015."
Cities worldwide are not doing enough to protect citizens from the likely impacts of climate change, according to a new analysis from the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, CO. The report says cities are unprepared for rising seas and intensified heat waves, while failing to curb their own greenhouse gas emissions.
Study links longer allergy season to climate change
.
Allergy sufferers are suffering a bit longer each year in the Red River Valley due to climate change, according to a new study by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which tracked weather and pollen data from 1995 to 2009 at 10 sites across central North America.
US Navy ill-prepared for new Arctic frontier: Study
.
Climate change is rapidly transforming the Arctic and the US Navy is falling behind as international powers jockey for power over vast oil resources, suggested a US study released on Thursday.
Business news…Extreme weather and unrest in the Middle East edition…
.
EU's Hedegaard says climate change fueled Middle East revolts
.
European Union Climate Commissioner Connie Hedegaard said extreme weather conditions linked to climate change were a factor in the unrest unfolding the Middle East and North Africa.
@Nightversionn Great post Nightversionn! To save the planet and stop Global Warming we need to get that Carbon Tax implemented on the cause of it, the fascist USA. Make sure you do not let any deniers try and say that Global Warming is BS because India and China are not getting carbon taxed, as they are not responsible for Anthropogenic Global Warming, the US is!
Study illustrates shifting Alaska boreal forest ecosystem
.
A new study released in the scientific journal Ecology Letters offers one of the first confirmations of a wholesale shift in the boreal forest ecosystem due to climate change.
Regional weather is just that, regional. Global Temperatures have been going up, due to the US's continued outpouring of CO2 and lack of green technologies implementation, like India and China are doing. They are shining examples of great stewardship. Fascist capitalist USA needs to cut Global Warming causing emissions via Carbon taxes to reverse this and begin the cool down processes
Climate change keenly felt in Alaska's national parks
.
A rapidly warming climate is reshaping Denali, Kenai Fjords and other national parks comprising the crown jewels of Alaska's heritage as America's last frontier.
The Vid is hilarious and now let me tell the college kids, Al Gore celebs and all the other city people who are so ignorant of REAL nature, animals, trees and the 'environment' something very important:
- Warmth = LIFE. A mild winter + longer summer = plants and animals grows and multiplies like a life-bomb up here.
- Coldest years (recent one actually) = Dead deer, shrinking bush, less life.
The enviro-cult is so ignorant of this BASIC fact of life and yet want to tell anyone how life works?
@ElProximo Baloney, heating up the globe and co2 emissions are not going to be "good for life" Just the opposite. Take ocean acidification alone, that means dead oceans! And it's already happening.
.
Are you advocated comfortably burning fossil fuels until we're all dead???? NO THANKS oil shill
You added Co2 emissions to my post. This is how liars like you manipulate and deceive people. You change words and meanings and attribute falsehoods onto others. Its because you are a bad person inside.
Now let me school you city boy: In the real natural world it is nothing short of a fundamental understanding of life around us - warmer = more and more life.
@ElProximo It is implicit in saying "warmer" that this is due to co2. And I've hear the denier sock puppet accounts go on about co2 co2 co2 CO2 means more life!!!! thousands of times!!! Don't play your little coy game with me. Please
.
If anyone would take your denier post seriously then they have problems anyway
@ElProximo Here's a few results of your wonderful warmer world (increased co2)
.
— Himalayan glaciers are likely to recede, producing fresh water shortages for billions — Receding Arctic ice could trigger a territorial conflict involving Russia, the United States, Canada and others. — Sea level rise in Bangladesh, and drought could unleash a flood of cross-border "climate refugees" and violence. — The Indian Ocean island of Diego Garcia, an atoll only a few feet above sea level
I think it is hilarious that odd time I mention some common knowledge about the environment (real life one) there are a flurry of tards like you with actual 'catchphrases' and 'conspiracy theories' about alleged oil-shills. Its funny and sad. In the real world we know warmer and shorter winters = explosion of flora and fauna. I know this because I have to avoid hitting deer after 2 warmer seasons and the forest tries to encroach on us.
There has been an Ocean warming rate of 0.85 Watts per square metre from 1993 to 2003.While between 2000-2004 the planet has been accumulating energy at a rate of 0.9 Watts per square metre.- Willis 2004
No global cooling here. Try another planet e.g. Uranus, now that IS cooling. p.s. Worry about global warming impacts in the next 100 years, not an ice age in over 10,000 years.
At the root of the man made global warming hoax is a progressive political movement.
C02 is the means to their ends to removing your liberties. Just look at the unelected nameless faceless bureaucrats in the EPA ....who now and regulate what you breath out.
Attention: all believers in Man made global warming::::: I have GENUINE, thats GENUINE Area 51 Alien artifacts for sale but HURRY they will not last long!! Also, I will throw in FREE...thats FREE "GENUINE" Atlantis Island Treasure!!! This is a ONE TIME Offer and will NEVER be repeated!!
I am happy to say that you don't need to be scared anymore. The global temperature is not going down. In fact, 2010 has been the warmest year ever recorded, according to National Climatic Data Center (NCDC).
Good joke. You just about scared the crap out of me, buddy.
@Siddis33 I hate to fight on this subject, but history has shown that before every ice age there has been periods of higher heat. The earth is NOT at it's hottest, it's been far hotter before we started keeping records but has still been tracked. Just because they weren't counted doesn't mean they didn't happen. So we could very well be on our way to a freeze over. You and I will probably never live long enough to see it, but it will happen. Just saying, I'm not looking to be flamed.
@BrittneyConnell So what has history got to do with something that has never happened before? There has never been emitted so much CO2 over such a short period before, and we have never been so dependent on stable conditions.
And the people who say it is nothing to worry about are usually deluded with crazy conspirator theories.
@BrittneyConnell What research should I do? I could check up on the absorbsion specter of CO2 which shows that CO2 absorb infrared radiation. How can this NOT leads to higher temeratures? What evidence is there that shows that this doesn't happen after all? This is Nobel Prize material. Global Warming deniers should be all over it.
And why do you conclude that the least educated side of the discussion is correct, without knowing anything yourself?
@Siddis33 Check out the following article which points out the poor science by those who believe in AGW. If you have time, explore the Pachaurigate, Glaciergate, and Climategate scandals mentioned in the article, and check out The Corbett Report on YouTube -- on that channel, you will have to search for his global warming program, as he reports weekly on many topics.
Any further discussion of this will be ignored, so don't waste your time. I did not wish to fight on this subject, simply state the fact that another iceage is very much possible, not a "joke" as you put it.
Thank you and may your lack of maturity please fade. Good luck.
Actually, Nightversionn - You sound like you have no proof and are arguing from a merely emotional stand point.
The scientific community is divided, but let's not mince words.
Science by definition is not always as the scientific community does, and most people within the scientific community voicing opinions are not experts on this matter.
A popular theoretical model is no more right than racism.
The media does not make a theoretical model a fact, nor does popularity.
So meteorological computing can not with any reasonable degree (90%) of accuracy, predict exact weather patterns within a 48 hour period, yet computer models are capable of exacting data extrapolations over decades into the future?
Sounds like a certain naughty scientist here or there is doing a little tinkering with the input data.
No?
Then I guess it all makes perfect sense, unless of course you demand rigorous scientific scrutiny of course.
@AJatethewaffles No it doesn't. The scientific community is saying we have a problem with global warming. It's that simple. Either you have been duped or are just another sock account oil industry troll lying about it, to be blunt
Puny tiny humans, billions of us pumping millions of tons of co2 into the atmosphere all at once (since the Industrial Revolution, all at once in relation to the age of the planet).
.
What possible harm could come of that? (Answer, if you can't think of any then you need to go back and think it through again)
@AJatethewaffles That's right, everything is proper balance, and that includes co2. Right now we have an excess of it in the atmosphere and we need to lower it
I suppose we would blame our selves for bringing an end to the ice age, if we were here during that time. And would we blame our selves for the dinosaurs going extinct? Humans give them selves way too much credit. We can not effect the earth like we think we can. The earth can wipe us out any time it wants to.
people are so retarded! The globe has been on a warming trend every since the ice age...well, duh! At some point it will peak, and start a global cooling trend. The earth has been going through these cycles for millions of years. And will continue to do so after we are gone. We speak of "normal" weather vs abnormal? We been recording weather for just 100-200 years. The earth has been here for millions of years. How do we know what "normal" is? Humans living on earth is actually abnormal.
For all those weak-minded, gullible global warming DENIERS out there who have bought into the pathological lies and strategic hype of paranoia porn radio - Search YouTube for video "MYTHBUSTERS confirm carbon dioxide warms the air".
@Tervinger So what cause the Medieval Warming Period (MWP) which had warmer temps than today and yet had lower CO2 levels? Unless the MWP can be discredited, the AGW hypothesis fails...
@nlpjohn The MWP was not a global event. It was warmer in Europe and parts of the North Atlantic, but in other regions, for example in Central Asia and in most parts of the Southern Hemisphere it was cooler. Most of all, it was globally cooler than nowadays.
The MWP was caused by other mechanisms than the current global warming. At the time there was a higher solar radiation and less volcanic activity.
@Tervinger Not a global event? The Medieval Warming Period (MWP) Project has compiled the temp proxy studies around the world and it CLEARLY shows the MWP to be a world-wide event. All the supporting proxy studies can be found on CO2science/org. As for you other claims about volcanos and solar activity, you haven't provided any evidence to support your claims. Science require evidence, not claims...
@Tervinger You told me untruth. I went to that site 5 min ago and I saw over 100 peer reviewed papers. The papers are listed by region. You either didn't look or lacked the curiousity to look.
@nlpjohn You saw a some references that were interpreted by the persons who run that blog, mainly the Idso family. Their reconstructions from the data are completely flawed.
I have presented papers that refer to what I've said. You have presented a blog that merely presents an opinion based on misinterpretations of some papers, without presenting a single peer-reviewed publication that would back up the assumptions you have made.
@Tervinger I WILL QUOTE YOU: "That "CO2science/org" website is merely a blog and doesn't provide any peer reviewed publications." I demonstrated that you made an untrue statement. Now you are moving the goal posts and trying to rewrite history. Just say, 'My bad, I didn't see the reference peer review papers' on this website.' Making up another untruth does not do you any credit.
@nlpjohn Again: The refernces listed at that website do not refer to your assumptions. The blog owner took data from the papers he listed and misinterpreted them. There are no peer-reviewed papers that show that the MWP was a global event.
"Highly variable Northern Hemisphere temperatures reconstructed from low- and high-resolution proxy data", Moberg et al., 2005
"Global Signatures and Dynamical Origins of the Little Ice Age and Medieval Climate Anomaly", Mann et al., 2009
"Extensive glaciers in northwest North America during Medieval time", Koch / Clague, 2010 The NOAA merged land air and sea surface temperature dataset (->esrl noaa gov)
@Tervinger Moberg's data shows a MWP. I can't accept MichaelMann as a source. He was a failed PhD student who flucked his orals, who was plucked out of obscurity because of his discredited hockey stick graph. Mann was also part of the "hide the decline" conspiracy. Even warmists Richard Muller and Judith Curry despise Mann. As for the Koch paper it proves nothing. The CO2scienceorg has compiled the peer reviewed which show the MWP to be both a world-wide phenom and warmer than modern temp
@nlpjohn -"I can't accept MichaelMann as a source"-
What you accept or not is absolutely irrelevant. It is a peer reviewed paper, accepted by the scientific community, and there's no rebuttal of it existing.
Come back when you can present a valid scientific source. As long as you can't do that, I'll ignore your further comments.
@Tervinger Ignore? So what is new? You've continue to ignored the peer review studies used to compile the MWP Project. You can run from debates but the fact remains the same that we sceptics are winning. Don't believe me, look at the polls. Sceptics are the majority in the USA and UK. And the poll trends tell us that Germany will be the next domino to fall. Running away from debates, ignoring FOIA, and "hiding the decline" is what has brought ruin to the cap-and-trade lobby.
@nlpjohn Your tirades against Michael Mann and "warmists" show that you are not interested in an objective discussion or serious arguments. I further doubt that you understand the scientific aspects of this topic, at least you are not really interested. However, science is not made by webblog propaganda and polls, it is made by research only.
I'm not interested in your political views and rants. Talking to you is futile, a waste of time.
@Tervinger The polls are everything. The people will decide whether we drive in little electric clown cars that need $15,000 worth of batteries replaced every 5 years. The people will decide whether we implement a CO2 cap-and-tax plan. As for your accusations, you have proven you lacked the curiousity to study the MWP Project's data so your accusations that I lack the interest to understand the scientific aspects ring a bit hollow in my ears...
@nlpjohn You are not a sceptic, you are an AGW-denier. Real sceptics do serious research and are also skeptic towards their own views. Science is not a case of winning debates and polls, and it is not made by the opinion of laymen.
No one doubts that the papers listed at the "CO2 Science" website are valid. They took some data from those papers, but the conclusions which are made from it are not peer-reviewed, and not part of those papers. It's merely propaganda in disguise of science.
@MaluronLurette Actually winning the polls is everything. It is the common people that will decide whether a CO2 cap-and-tax plan is implemented. And to be a scientist you must follow the scientific method. And the scientific method involves the COMPLETE publication of data/methodology. In the USA, alarmists regularly denying FOIA (freedom of information act) requests from sceptics seeking details. No where in the scientific method is "peer review" a requirement. I'm on the side of science.
A poll doesn't change the scientific facts and taxes are a political matter, and not subject of natural science. You can also make a poll if people believe in gravity or not, and in Kansas you would perhaps even get a majority of disbelievers but that will not stop things from falling down.
@MaluronLurette Everything you say about polls is true however it does not change the fact that it will be voters that determine the proper course of action. There have been clear perversions of science with regard to the AGW hypothesis. Failure to follow the scientific method (providing COMPLETE methodologies and data sets) and the perversion of the "peer review" process to exclude studies based on their findings. The scandals have changed public opinions in both the USA/UK.
@nlpjohn "that determine the proper course of action"
But again, that doesn't change the facts. If it contradicts the facts, it will be the wrong course of action, no matter if it was decided by the majority; democracy is not infallible.
"There have been clear perversions of science"
Only in the fantasy of some conspiracy therorists.
"the AGW hypothesis."
LOL. It's not a hypothesis, it is an observable, measurable and explainable phenomenon.
@MaluronLurette Conspiracy theorists comprise perhaps 5% of the population. However, sceptics are the majority in the USA/UK. The last Der Spiegel poll shows German sceptics headed to the majority as well. You can call the majority of the people conspiracy theorists but it won't make the AGW scandals go away. Your lack of curiousity to other view points will insure your mind will not be easily changed. Oh well I tried... Thank you for the debate but I believe we have reached an impass.
@nlpjohn "skeptics are the majority in the USA/UK"
You need an advanced knowledge on a topic to become a serious skeptic and a personal disbelief is not sufficient. These "skeptics" aren't experts, they usually deny AGW because of personal reasons and political motives, like the fear to pay higher taxes.
"You can call the majority of the people conspiracy theorists"
Only the ones who publish the propaganda. The others are merely fools who believe what they want to believe.
@MaluronLurette Got to surfacestations/org to see the audits of US surface temp stations. The pictures of faulty temp stations alone makes this site worthy of a visit. 69% of US temp stations have errors of 1 degree C or greater. The temp data from 3rd world nations are even worse. And there are accusations of data manipulation in the USA. The opinion polls in the USA/UK did not magically change by themselves. The credit belongs w/ the many AGW scandals that were discovered.
I'm not interested in propaganda websites. I prefer first hand data.
"The opinion polls in the USA/UK did not magically change"
Indeed. It changed because of propaganda and the ignorance of the people.
That is exactly the reason why science is not made by polls and opinion of laymen, but by research of experts. And more than 97% of all climate experts worldwide aggree that humans are causing the climate to change.
@nlpjohn "In the USA, alarmists regularly denying FOIA (freedom of information act) requests from sceptics seeking details"
Pure propaganda. Actually, all data is published.
"No where in the scientific method is "peer review" a requirement. "
Peer review is only ONE (but very successful) restriction to guarantee that publications respect the scientific method and to avoid a flood of pseudoscience. A lot of stuff that failed peer-review is nevertheless published, however only to fail again.
Muller a "warmist"? LOL. He intentionally misquoted that (in)famous email only to discredit Mann. In the original email you can see that the 'hide the decline' comment didn't refer to Mann's work, but to Keith Briffa's, and that in a different context.
"Mann was also part of the "hide the decline" conspiracy"
Have you ever read one of Mann's papers? Then explain what he has allegedly hidden. LOL, he even gave an internet link to the raw data he used.
@MaluronLurette Your facts are incorrect. Michael Mann also used "the trick" where data after 1960 that had an alleged "divergence" problem was ommitted from the graphs. I have the Mann et al graphs to prove it. That alone was a seedy technique but they plotted the thermometer readings for 1960+ and used mathematical smoothing to give the illusion that there was one continuous graph through 1960. On Stephen McIntyre's site climateaudit/org he details Mann's transgressions in great detail.
@nlpjohn That was not what I was talking about. I referred to Muller intentionally misquoting Phil Jones' email.
However, "Mike's trick" refers to a technique used by Mann to plot instrumental temperature data on the same graph as the reconstructed data over the past millennium. In his graphs everything was labelled properly and nothing was hidden.
The "decline" does not refer to global temperature but to a decline in tree growth at certain high-latitude locations, mentioned in Briffa's paper.
@MaluronLurette His graphs certainly did ***NOT*** labled as you describe. Warmist Dr Judith Curry was also fooled by the "nature's trick". And the tree ring data after 1960 did show a temp decline. And since when is it scientific to fuse two different data sets together using mathematical smoothing? There was no reason to include thermometer readings just for 1960+ unless the purpose was to hide contrary data.
@nlpjohn "His graphs certainly did ***NOT*** labled as you describe."
Of course they are. Perhaps you shouldn't use the manipulated graph from your propaganda website.
I highly doubt that you ever read or even understood that paper. You exactly parrot what is said at those websites. Mann's paper was peer-reviewed and it is accepted by the scientific community. There's also a new one existing where he specified a lot of points. Further, his results have been confirmed by various new papers.
@nlpjohn "And since when is it scientific to fuse two different data sets together using mathematical smoothing?" -
Your claims are utter nonsense. The chart shows three different graphs, all properly labelled. Two reconstructions, and one from instrumental data. Nothing is fused together. Mann even added the uncertainty range, showing an increasing uncertainty as the reconstructions go further back in time.
@Tervinger Then you are not looking at the same graph as I. Dr Richard Muller (Berkley) made a youtube presentation of Mann's attempt to deceive him and other scientists. Perhaps you should watch Muller's presentation. Despite Mann's shenigans, Muller still believes the AGW hypothesis is valid (though I do not). If Muller's presentation fails to make an impression then I doubt I can do better and we are best ending this debate now...
@Tervinger Your response is a clear illustration why climate alarmists have been getting killed in public polls. You show no curiousity in those who challenge the AGW hypothesis. Smug comments and ignoring counter arguments might be red meat for your fellow AGW "true believers" but the public has a low opinion of such tactics. Ignoring challenges to the AGW hypothesis has been a losing strategy. Such myopia will guarantee that the AGW political movement will fail. You are your own worst enemy
@nlpjohn You still don't get it. Neither polls nor this "debate", or any debate is relevant. Science is neither made by debates nor by polls, it is made by research ONLY. The public opinion is worth a shit and will not change scientific facts. I don't care for polls, or if the USA will raise taxes or not, or whatever like that.
"ignoring counter arguments" -
You haven't presented a single valid argument. All you do is ranting and defaming scientists, while you dodge all scientific facts.
@Tervinger You are repeating points you have made earlier. Refer to my previous response. You can't claim to be on the side of science while dodging counter arguments to a proposed hypothsis. But in the end your opinion or my opinion does not matter. It will be the tax paying public that decides the validity of the AGW hypothesis and whether to fund CO2 cap and tax plans...
@nlpjohn You said: "the tax paying public that decides the validity of the AGW" -nope it was scientists and evidence who decide the most likely validity, whether the public takes notice or not is another matter.
@nlpjohn See: Global warming estimates, media expectations...William R. Freudenburg (2010) "The findings indicate that supposed challenges to the science on global warming need to be subjected to greater scrutiny,if reporters wish to discuss ‘‘both sides’’ of the climate issue, the scientifically legitimate ‘‘other side’’ is that, if anything, global climate disruption may prove to be significantly worse than has been suggested in scientific estimates to date.
@MaluronLurette None of these papers address Mann using computer code to over-weight some data and under-weight other data. Stephen McIntyre was able to recreate the "hockey stick" graph using random data. You are defending the indefensible... Michael Mann is a charleton. But perhaps I'm being too harsh. Mann has done more for the AGW sceptic cause than anyone else. Including Keith Briffa and Phil Jones.
@nlpjohn "None of these papers address Mann using computer code to over-weight some data and under-weight other data."
LOL. Because Mann never did something like that.
You NEVER have read the paper yourself, that is obvious. You poorly try to impersonate an expert to judge a scientific publication although you don't even understand the first sentence in the abstract.
Again, do you even know the difference between climate change and global warming?
The papers from Huang, Smith and Oerlemanns are using different methods, reconstructions from data taken from boreholes, stalagmites and glaciers which all came to the same result, confirming Mann's results.
Wahl's paper is an independent reconstruction of the data, and he got the same results as Mann.
In his new paper (2008), Mann added several new reconstuctions made with different methods which confirm his previous results.
@Tervinger Oh? They used computer code to eliminate "noise" data like Mann? Some people call this cherry-picking the data. I think your debate strategy to defend Mann is a losing strategy. Many fellow warmists treat Mann like a leper that he truly is. If your local library has the book, "The Hockey Stick Illusion" by Andrew Montford, and you are curious, I would read that book. The book details Mann's deception in far more detail than I could.
@nlpjohn I've just checked the "hockey stick" graph from Mann's 1999 again. Instrumental data and reconstructions are clearly seperated and labelled correctly , there is no such 'illusion' you are talking about, and no 'seedy technique' has been used. Well, at least not to people who have the scientific knowledge to understand the graph. Mann gives all the information how he came to these results and he gives a link to the raw data he used. No seedy tricks, no hidden information, no decline.
@MaluronLurette And I check Mann's graph on wikipedia and no where on the graph does it say that thermometer readings from 1960+ were included on his graph or that tree ring data from 1960+ was ommitted. The simply truth is you do not know the facts...
@nlpjohn "The simply truth is you do not know the facts..."
Facts? You actually mean "propaganda".
C'mon, you got your ass handed back to you and you know that. Your poor attempts to dodge the arguments simply by parroting those propaganda websites again and again are ridiculous.
Mann's papers are a valid scientific source, highly accepted by the scientific community, and you will not change that. Now THAT is a fact. Discussion over.
@MaluronLurette My ass feels quite well. And I am content that you think Michael Mann's work is valid. I'm in good company w/ Dr Richard Muller, Dr Judith Curry, and many others who think Mann is an unscupulous fraud. Meanwhile I will sip a lemonade and wait for the latest Der Spiegel polls showing Germany joining the sceptic community. Victory over the AGW debate will occur in the polls...not in a youtube debate.
@nlpjohn "Der Spiegel polls showing Germany joining the sceptic community"-
LOL. The Green party currently would get 24% in an election. It is even quite probable that the next German chancellor will be from the "warmist" party #1.
And no, I don't want to discuss this point, nor do I sympathise with that party. It's only FYI.
Alright, this time I mean it, I'll leave this 'debate'. All is said.
(II) [...] It's true that solar activity is slightly decreasing (disproving the common argument, that solar activity would cause the current global warming). But even if we would face a new Maunder minimum, the CO2 effect is too strong and we would merely observe a less accelerated warming. BTW, the current short term cooling is caused by the thermal transfer between the atmosphere and the oceans. The total heat content is still growing, means that there's still global warming.[...]
(i) Funny video. But we are not heading into a new ice age. The warming effect of an increased (and still increasing) level of CO2 exceeds cooling effects of other factors, such as solar activity or earth orbit and axial tilt.
The 'Little Ice Age' that was mentioned in the vid was caused by a lower solar activity (the Maunder minimum) combined with high volcanic activity.[...]
@turtle4aire That is baloney. I take it we have yet another sock puppet denier. Man's burning of fossil fuels caused changes in the physical world, temperature increase. Gore is not some magician that can magically change nature.
.
Science is telling us what is happening.
.
What an oil troll. And by the way, do you have any sources to back up your childish baloney. I'll be waiting
DONT READ THIS CAUSE IT REALLY WORKS.YOU WILL GET KISSED ON THE NEAREST POSSIBLE FRIDAY BY THE LOVE OF UR LIFE.TOMORROW WILL BE THE BEST DAY OF YOUR LIFE.HOWEVER IF YOU DONT POST THIS COMMENT TO AT LEAST 3 VIDEOS OR YOU WILL DIE WITHIN 2 DAYS.NOW UV STARTED READIN DIS DUNT STOP THIS IS SO SCARY.SEND THIS OVER TO 5 VIDEOS IN 143 MINUTES WHEN UR DONE PRESS F6 AND UR CRUSHES NAME WILL APPEAR ON THE SCREEN IN BIG LETTERS.THIS IS SO SCARY BUT REALLY WORKS
World Bank pressured over record fossil fuels lending
.
With new figures showing a record amount of World Bank funding for projects relying on coal power and other fossil fuels, the issue of reforming the institution's energy lending was once again a hot topic at the World Bank and IMF annual meetings, which concluded over the weekend.
Randomlaughingman removed her comment on random, (not before I caught it haha) after she realized others seeing the same stupid rhymes would realize the two freaks were really one.
How's this "TheRandomElasticJesusLaughingMPDfreak"
randomlaughingman @Dayversion - lol Diversion. that should be ur channels' username then by that same rationale Biversion Triversion (for when u have that 3-in-1 trinity theme going) Y-version, for when u feel like a man or just have Ys on Hiversion, for when u do another line / pipe vi-version, for when ur using cli-*nix Ryeversion, for when ur on the sauce / off the wagon Niversion, for when ur looking for the Grail OhAyeVersion, for those rare times when ur bs-detector is working
Massive rainfall causing floods narrowly missed the climate change negotiators who met for another round of talks in Tianjin last week, with rather disappointing results.
some really good stuff here
distractionxx 10 hours ago
NOAA: 2010 Tied For Warmest Year on Record
According to NOAA scientists, 2010 tied with 2005 as the warmest year of the global surface temperature record, beginning in 1880. This was the 34th ...
NASA - NASA Finds 2011 Ninth Warmest Year on Record
The difference between 2011 and the warmest year in the GISS record (2010) is 0.22 degrees F (0.12 C).
livingproofof 6 days ago
Very enjoyable thank you
thegeffc 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
After initializing and parameterizing hundreds of unknown factors, inserting divergent proxy data and ignoring any difficult natural forcing factors, we ran hundreds of simulations until we obtained the results we wanted–an ensemble of meaningless projected results, which we then averaged. We homogenized, adjusted and used the liberally unprincipled component method, and produced a new set of hockey sticks, giving a very robust prediction (>90% likelihood) that we are all being totally screwed
1000frolly 1 week ago
More evidence/impacts of climate change series..
(Please read article before the denier with all the sock puppet accounts censors it)..
.
How the Dutch make 'room for the river' by redesigning downtown
.
For centuries, the Dutch have built higher and higher dikes to keep waters at bay in a country where 55 percent of housing is located in areas prone to flooding. But climate change has convinced them this approach will no longer work.
.
ClimateWire
21 January 2012
Nightversionn 1 week ago
i enjoyed this vid
MrJonkelp 1 week ago
very interesting video thanks
thegeffc 2 weeks ago
Scientists say cut soot, methane to curb warming
AP-An international team of scientists says it has figured out how to slow global warming: Stop focusing so much on carbon dioxide. They say the key is to reduce emissions of two powerful and fast-acting causes of global warming — methane and soot.
Two dozen scientists from around the world ran computer models of 400 different existing pollution control measures and came up with 14 methods that attack methane and soot.
RandomVersion 2 weeks ago
Check out youtube.com/user/ta7king for a simple but scientific explanation. Watch all the videos, and then make up your mind! The video course is for school children, so it should be easy enough for anyone to understand B - )
ta7king 3 weeks ago
You are a complete MORON. The climate has RISEN 0.7 degrees Celsius in the past 100 years. It is proven that the only thing that can change our average temperature over a long period of time is solar radiance, which has gone DOWN over the past 100 years, yet the planet's temperature has still RISEN over the past 100 years, and faster than it ever has in recorded history. 0.7 degrees is very significant when you consider the fact that the coldest ever ice age was only 5 degrees cooler than today.
vTheBlueprinTv 3 weeks ago
@vTheBlueprinTv
You claims are ALL tosh
It has risen 0.7c since 1850; last ice age was 9c cooler; rate of rise is not fast
The solar guys are not claiming irradiance.
The mechanism is magnetic effects and changes in the solar wind, causing less high-energy cosmic rays resulting in less low level cloud cover, and so a warmer Earth.
-It was warmer than now 1,000 years ago, 2,000 years ago, 3,400 years ago, 6,800 years ago, 7,800 years ago, 9,000 years ago, 125,000 years ago, 240,000, 325,000 ect.
1000frolly 1 week ago
@1000frolly Your statement is false. Btw, I got that information in school from my professor at Western Michigan University. He does research in global warming, and studies it extensively.
vTheBlueprinTv 1 week ago
Comment removed
1000frolly 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@vTheBlueprinTv
If your professor told you "It is proven that the only thing that can change our average temperature over a long period of time is solar radiance"
Then he is wrong. He obviously knows little about the solar magnetosphere, charged particles or the solar wind/heiliosphere. Solar irradiance went up sharply right through the 20th century.
Irradiance has only been falling since 2000.
What is NOT proven (or is even likely) is that CO2 is causing the current warming.
1000frolly 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@vTheBlueprinTv
If your professor told you "It is proven that the only thing that can change our average temperature over a long period of time is solar radiance"
Then he is wrong. He obviously knows little about the solar magnetosphere, charged particles or the solar wind/heiliosphere. Solar irradiance went up sharply right through the 20th century.
Irradiance has only been falling since 2000.
What is NOT proven (or is even likely) is that CO2 is causing the current warming
1000frolly 1 week ago
@1000frolly Also, you misread my statement. I was saying that our planet is NOT warming because of solar irradiance. That was my entire argument. Solar irradiance (the only real natural long term climate changer) is going down, yet our planet's temperature is going up. However, you may be right about it rising 0.7 since 1850, instead of "over the past 100 years", but that's just a minor detail. He's saying in the vid that the temp has gone DOWN 0.7, which is completely wrong.
vTheBlueprinTv 1 week ago
0:12 .....Frezned?
mrluini 1 month ago
It's been said that the main problem is that there isn't enough to go around period. Americans are 5% of the world's population, yet use 23% of its energy. Now imagine if China and India, which are almost 1/3 of the world's population, demanded to live the same way as Americans...
Nightversionn 6 months ago
Al Gore's paid climate scientists studies have found, CO2 emissions from the US are the problem, not CO2 emissions from India or China
JoeJohn90 6 months ago
More climate change news…
Australia "0.7 DEGREES WARMER over past 50 years."
Australia's top science body said on Monday temperatures had risen about 0.7 degrees Celsius in the last 50 years, describing the finding as "significant evidence" of CLIMATE CHANGE.
.
Agence France-Presse
15 March 2010
Nightversionn 6 months ago
@Nightversionn
Who invents this bull? I think you are talking about the CSIRO, a well-known IPCC support group. There is no truth to this.
As anyone in the field knows from all temperature records the southern hemisphere is warming at a much slower rate than the northern H.
Example; University of Alabama Huntsville shows a 0.2c warming, RSS shows 0.2c warming (satellite, since 1979), The further south you go, the less it is; Antarctica has had a 0.5c FALL (UAH)
1000frolly 1 week ago
Gore has done nothing but be correct about climate change and try to make the world a better place from what I can tell. He at least deserves thanks and not the oil industry troll sock puppets who trash him full time on the internet
Nightversionn 6 months ago
@Nightversionn ROTFLMAO...Bud, you obviously don't realize the Groeacle's movie contains 9 (yes NINE) factual errors.
Sure got him rich didn't it?!?!?
ajmo7298 6 months ago
Al Gore always keeps his promises, whichever he reaches first, a multi-billionaire or dead, he will then stop his polluting lifestyle, and divest himself of all of his mansions, jet and limo rides, heated swimming pools, consumption of the choicest cuts of dead cows, expensive murdered lobsters etc
DrMarkGubbishJr 6 months ago
Science news..(only for those interested please)..
.
New Study: Forests absorb a third of world's CO2 emissions
.
The world's forests take up roughly a third of the carbon dioxide emitted from burning fossil fuels each year.
But deforestation in the tropics sends about half that amount back into the atmosphere, reports a new study.
.
CBC Canada
15 July 2011
Nightversionn 6 months ago
watch?v=HbH05-JC9II Check it out.. Co2 pollution measurement done in pounds and in laymen terms. Easy to understand.
Ravalat 6 months ago
The only enslavement going on is done by oil companies with their trillion dollar stranglehold over the world
Nightversionn 6 months ago
it is about enslavement ,taxing everything we do even breathing!! like what william wilberforce said "give the slaves some money and then you don't call them slaves any more" well might not be in the same words but the meaning was the same!!!! but now they are taking it all back little by little!! we're slaves to Capitalism, Consumerism. Some PPl are playing a dangerous game of SIMS
14allovus 7 months ago
That is actually a good video.
The voice is masculine.
Not the homo voice of liberal.
tnekkc 7 months ago
The Global Warming experts told us no more snow and disappearing glaciers a few years ago. Now that we have growing glaciers and record breaking snow, they change their pied piper tunes from global warming to climate change
DaveGibbagglers 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The last decade was the hottest on modern record. - WMO
The benefits of a price on carbon outweigh the costs several times over. -Stern Review on the Economics of Climate Change
The warming trend over 1970 to 2001 is greater than warming from both 1860 to 1880 and 1910 to 1940. GISS/ NOAA
checkyoursources 8 months ago
To see the truth that is driving these carboneer monkeys more crazy than they are
Growing glaciers due to Global Warming
Search "Glaciers growing in Spain" "12 More Glaciers that Have Not Heard The Newss About Global Warming" "Our Glaciers Are Growing Not Melting: More Falsehoods From Al Gore" "Perito Moreno The Politically Incorrect Glacier"
DaveGibbagglers 9 months ago
@DaveGibbagglers Why focus on one place? Are more glaciers growing or shrinking worldwide?
Answer: Shrinking and the shrinking is accelerating See: World Glacier Monitoring Service (WGMS) or Greene (2005) for why Dave's comment is misleading about glaciers globally.
checkyoursources 8 months ago 2
I hope all yall bitches enjoy your hyperthermia.
Mematman15 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The Global Warming experts told us no more snow and disappearing glaciers a few years ago. Now that we have growing glaciers and record breaking snow, they change their pied piper tunes from global warming to climate change. And now these global warming Talibans want to jihad me for exposing their dogma.
DaveGibbagglers 9 months ago
were makin g a new 'up' and fast.
Daily petro consumption is 85,000,000 A DAY - where does it go
Air (heat retention)
Seas (carbolic acid)
Nether world ( right wing majic)
PacificCircle1 9 months ago
@PacificCircle1 You make a great point in stopping immigration from third world peoples to a first world culture, increase of Petro consumption. Do you have some more info we can use to stop immigration?
DaveGibbagglers 9 months ago
@DaveGibbagglers Consumption going up world wide -China - India Immigration probably not much of a factor
PacificCircle1 9 months ago
@PacificCircle1 Yes then the US needs to be left alone as the pollution is coming from China and India. Too bad Clinton and Gore pushed for the creation of the WTO and gave China MFN, and Permanent Normal Trade Relations, until they could push getting them into the WTO. Now almost all OF the US industry IS IN China with lax environmental regulations and then huge amounts of CO2 emitted to ship the crap back here. Thanks Al Gore and Bill Clinton, oooppppsssss
DaveGibbagglers 9 months ago
@DaveGibbagglers I mostly agree, but it takes energy, no matter were something is made -we don't
have buy that stuff.
PacificCircle1 9 months ago
Climate in the news (for those interested…)…
.
Erosion by climate change biggest threat to Sunderbans
.
The debate on the vulnerability of Sunderbans as one of the hot spots of climate change continues – experts have predicted that at least a "dozen islands on the South-western part of the mangrove swamps are likely to lose an average of 65 per cent of their land by 2015."
.
New Dehli Daily Pioneer India
16 April 2011
Nightversionn 9 months ago
Climate news..from NCAR
.
Cities fiddle while world warms: Report
.
Cities worldwide are not doing enough to protect citizens from the likely impacts of climate change, according to a new analysis from the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, CO. The report says cities are unprepared for rising seas and intensified heat waves, while failing to curb their own greenhouse gas emissions.
.
San Francisco KQED California
12 April 2011
Nightversionn 9 months ago
Has Al Gore explained how his Perito Moreno glacier is growing not shrinking?
DaveGibbagglers 9 months ago
@DaveGibbagglers Have you explained why you're a denier troll astro sock puppet for Big Oil Yet, astroturf?
Nightversionn 9 months ago
@Nightversionn Have you explained why your a carbooneeer troll ding dong ?
DaveGibbagglers 9 months ago
Science news.. (for those interested..)
.
Study links longer allergy season to climate change
.
Allergy sufferers are suffering a bit longer each year in the Red River Valley due to climate change, according to a new study by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which tracked weather and pollen data from 1995 to 2009 at 10 sites across central North America.
.
Fargo-Moorhead Forum North Dakota
27 March 2011
Nightversionn 10 months ago
Climate has always changed.
The commies want you to pay to stop it.
No chance.
muiroford1 10 months ago
@muiroford1 Baloney. Climate changes but this time mankind is accelerating that change.
Nightversionn 10 months ago
@muiroford1 So sez the Oil troll
Nightversionn 10 months ago
@muiroford1 They also want to you get an education, see you didn't do that either. No chance.
SirAvalord 10 months ago
Yes sir, 2 out of 3 picks on the right will find you the Greenpreach troller.
patioperson 10 months ago
Science news..
.
US Navy ill-prepared for new Arctic frontier: Study
.
Climate change is rapidly transforming the Arctic and the US Navy is falling behind as international powers jockey for power over vast oil resources, suggested a US study released on Thursday.
.
Agence France-Presse
11 March 2011
Nightversionn 10 months ago
You are absolutly right !
Zealot155 10 months ago
Business news…Extreme weather and unrest in the Middle East edition…
.
EU's Hedegaard says climate change fueled Middle East revolts
.
European Union Climate Commissioner Connie Hedegaard said extreme weather conditions linked to climate change were a factor in the unrest unfolding the Middle East and North Africa.
.
Bloomberg News
4 March 2011
Nightversionn 11 months ago
@Nightversionn Great post Nightversionn! To save the planet and stop Global Warming we need to get that Carbon Tax implemented on the cause of it, the fascist USA. Make sure you do not let any deniers try and say that Global Warming is BS because India and China are not getting carbon taxed, as they are not responsible for Anthropogenic Global Warming, the US is!
JoeJohn90 10 months ago
@JoeJohn90 what was that troll?
Nightversionn 10 months ago
sorry deniers but...
.
Global warming shifting ecosystems in the news...
.
Study illustrates shifting Alaska boreal forest ecosystem
.
A new study released in the scientific journal Ecology Letters offers one of the first confirmations of a wholesale shift in the boreal forest ecosystem due to climate change.
.Cordova Times, Alaska
2 March 2011
Nightversionn 11 months ago
Regional weather is just that, regional. Global Temperatures have been going up, due to the US's continued outpouring of CO2 and lack of green technologies implementation, like India and China are doing. They are shining examples of great stewardship. Fascist capitalist USA needs to cut Global Warming causing emissions via Carbon taxes to reverse this and begin the cool down processes
JoeJohn90 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The truth about global warming. You won't be disppointed.
The most devious conspiracy ever.
watch?v=wBfMT3q6n9A
TheElasticJesus 11 months ago
News..
.
Climate change keenly felt in Alaska's national parks
.
A rapidly warming climate is reshaping Denali, Kenai Fjords and other national parks comprising the crown jewels of Alaska's heritage as America's last frontier.
.
Reuters
13 February 2011
Nightversionn 11 months ago
The Vid is hilarious and now let me tell the college kids, Al Gore celebs and all the other city people who are so ignorant of REAL nature, animals, trees and the 'environment' something very important:
- Warmth = LIFE. A mild winter + longer summer = plants and animals grows and multiplies like a life-bomb up here.
- Coldest years (recent one actually) = Dead deer, shrinking bush, less life.
The enviro-cult is so ignorant of this BASIC fact of life and yet want to tell anyone how life works?
ElProximo 11 months ago
@ElProximo Baloney, heating up the globe and co2 emissions are not going to be "good for life" Just the opposite. Take ocean acidification alone, that means dead oceans! And it's already happening.
.
Are you advocated comfortably burning fossil fuels until we're all dead???? NO THANKS oil shill
Nightversionn 11 months ago
@Nightversionn
You added Co2 emissions to my post. This is how liars like you manipulate and deceive people. You change words and meanings and attribute falsehoods onto others. Its because you are a bad person inside.
Now let me school you city boy: In the real natural world it is nothing short of a fundamental understanding of life around us - warmer = more and more life.
Warm climates = massive amounts of life.
Cold climates = much much less life.
Not a 'debate'. Its reality.
ElProximo 11 months ago
@ElProximo It is implicit in saying "warmer" that this is due to co2. And I've hear the denier sock puppet accounts go on about co2 co2 co2 CO2 means more life!!!! thousands of times!!! Don't play your little coy game with me. Please
.
If anyone would take your denier post seriously then they have problems anyway
Nightversionn 11 months ago
@ElProximo Here's a few results of your wonderful warmer world (increased co2)
.
— Himalayan glaciers are likely to recede, producing fresh water shortages for billions — Receding Arctic ice could trigger a territorial conflict involving Russia, the United States, Canada and others. — Sea level rise in Bangladesh, and drought could unleash a flood of cross-border "climate refugees" and violence. — The Indian Ocean island of Diego Garcia, an atoll only a few feet above sea level
Nightversionn 11 months ago
(continued your wonderful vision of a heated up planet)
.
..(Diego Garcia) likely would disappear, taking away a critical U.S. military staging area...
Global warming viewed as US National Security Threat Now as has been for years:
Nightversionn 11 months ago
@ElProximo You are a deeply bad person if you suggest any of this is OK (as only oil trolls will suggest)
Nightversionn 11 months ago
@Nightversionn
I think it is hilarious that odd time I mention some common knowledge about the environment (real life one) there are a flurry of tards like you with actual 'catchphrases' and 'conspiracy theories' about alleged oil-shills. Its funny and sad. In the real world we know warmer and shorter winters = explosion of flora and fauna. I know this because I have to avoid hitting deer after 2 warmer seasons and the forest tries to encroach on us.
You obviously hate life.
ElProximo 11 months ago
Never mind rising CO2 levels or long term trends LOL this video made me chuckle.
cleanloader 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
There has been an Ocean warming rate of 0.85 Watts per square metre from 1993 to 2003.While between 2000-2004 the planet has been accumulating energy at a rate of 0.9 Watts per square metre.- Willis 2004
No global cooling here. Try another planet e.g. Uranus, now that IS cooling. p.s. Worry about global warming impacts in the next 100 years, not an ice age in over 10,000 years.
checkyoursources 11 months ago
The "global warming PRETENDERS" make me laugh.
basenjib123 11 months ago
At the root of the man made global warming hoax is a progressive political movement.
C02 is the means to their ends to removing your liberties. Just look at the unelected nameless faceless bureaucrats in the EPA ....who now and regulate what you breath out.
GreenChurchReject 1 year ago
swearing..crap your pants..or F word..turned me off..so not listening to this..u can reach more people ..clean up your sound
JTO500 1 year ago
Attention: all believers in Man made global warming::::: I have GENUINE, thats GENUINE Area 51 Alien artifacts for sale but HURRY they will not last long!! Also, I will throw in FREE...thats FREE "GENUINE" Atlantis Island Treasure!!! This is a ONE TIME Offer and will NEVER be repeated!!
basenjib123 1 year ago
I am happy to say that you don't need to be scared anymore. The global temperature is not going down. In fact, 2010 has been the warmest year ever recorded, according to National Climatic Data Center (NCDC).
Good joke. You just about scared the crap out of me, buddy.
Siddis33 1 year ago
@Siddis33 NO, last year was hottest ever recorded, ever.
Nightversionn 1 year ago
@Nightversionn Exactly. We are now in 2011 and last year was 2010, which was the hottest year ever recorded.
Siddis33 1 year ago
@Siddis33 Yeah it was, thanks. But the oil trolls will go around claiming global warming isn't happening.
Nightversionn 1 year ago 5
@Siddis33 I hate to fight on this subject, but history has shown that before every ice age there has been periods of higher heat. The earth is NOT at it's hottest, it's been far hotter before we started keeping records but has still been tracked. Just because they weren't counted doesn't mean they didn't happen. So we could very well be on our way to a freeze over. You and I will probably never live long enough to see it, but it will happen. Just saying, I'm not looking to be flamed.
BrittneyConnell 1 year ago
@BrittneyConnell So what has history got to do with something that has never happened before? There has never been emitted so much CO2 over such a short period before, and we have never been so dependent on stable conditions.
And the people who say it is nothing to worry about are usually deluded with crazy conspirator theories.
That worries me?
Siddis33 1 year ago
@Siddis33 I'n not saying it isn't something to be worried about, I'm just saying it IS possible for us to have another iceage soon.
If you did a bit of research you'd see that CO2 has pretty much nothing to do with the rise in temperature.
BrittneyConnell 1 year ago
@BrittneyConnell What research should I do? I could check up on the absorbsion specter of CO2 which shows that CO2 absorb infrared radiation. How can this NOT leads to higher temeratures? What evidence is there that shows that this doesn't happen after all? This is Nobel Prize material. Global Warming deniers should be all over it.
And why do you conclude that the least educated side of the discussion is correct, without knowing anything yourself?
Siddis33 1 year ago
@Siddis33 Check out the following article which points out the poor science by those who believe in AGW. If you have time, explore the Pachaurigate, Glaciergate, and Climategate scandals mentioned in the article, and check out The Corbett Report on YouTube -- on that channel, you will have to search for his global warming program, as he reports weekly on many topics.
James Corbett
The Corbett Report
29 January, 2010
BrittneyConnell 1 year ago
@Siddis33
Any further discussion of this will be ignored, so don't waste your time. I did not wish to fight on this subject, simply state the fact that another iceage is very much possible, not a "joke" as you put it.
Thank you and may your lack of maturity please fade. Good luck.
BrittneyConnell 1 year ago
Actually, Nightversionn - You sound like you have no proof and are arguing from a merely emotional stand point.
The scientific community is divided, but let's not mince words.
Science by definition is not always as the scientific community does, and most people within the scientific community voicing opinions are not experts on this matter.
A popular theoretical model is no more right than racism.
The media does not make a theoretical model a fact, nor does popularity.
AJatethewaffles 1 year ago
So meteorological computing can not with any reasonable degree (90%) of accuracy, predict exact weather patterns within a 48 hour period, yet computer models are capable of exacting data extrapolations over decades into the future?
Sounds like a certain naughty scientist here or there is doing a little tinkering with the input data.
No?
Then I guess it all makes perfect sense, unless of course you demand rigorous scientific scrutiny of course.
AJatethewaffles 1 year ago
@AJatethewaffles No it doesn't. The scientific community is saying we have a problem with global warming. It's that simple. Either you have been duped or are just another sock account oil industry troll lying about it, to be blunt
Nightversionn 1 year ago
Puny tiny humans, billions of us pumping millions of tons of co2 into the atmosphere all at once (since the Industrial Revolution, all at once in relation to the age of the planet).
.
What possible harm could come of that? (Answer, if you can't think of any then you need to go back and think it through again)
Nightversionn 1 year ago
@Nightversionn
Wouldn't it be great if there were some sort of plant that inhaled co2 and exhaled air?
Imagine millions of these plants?
Now imagine these plants growing bigger and stronger due to more co2 in the atmosphere and exhaling more and more air, creating a balance.
Now call these miracle plants - TREES
AJatethewaffles 1 year ago
@AJatethewaffles That's right, everything is proper balance, and that includes co2. Right now we have an excess of it in the atmosphere and we need to lower it
Nightversionn 1 year ago
@Nightversionn
A bag over your scrawny head would help laotian78 you spam addict.
checkyoursauces 1 year ago
@checkyoursauces get off the drugs dude
Nightversionn 1 year ago
I suppose we would blame our selves for bringing an end to the ice age, if we were here during that time. And would we blame our selves for the dinosaurs going extinct? Humans give them selves way too much credit. We can not effect the earth like we think we can. The earth can wipe us out any time it wants to.
Dav1ds1 1 year ago 3
people are so retarded! The globe has been on a warming trend every since the ice age...well, duh! At some point it will peak, and start a global cooling trend. The earth has been going through these cycles for millions of years. And will continue to do so after we are gone. We speak of "normal" weather vs abnormal? We been recording weather for just 100-200 years. The earth has been here for millions of years. How do we know what "normal" is? Humans living on earth is actually abnormal.
Dav1ds1 1 year ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
For all those weak-minded, gullible global warming DENIERS out there who have bought into the pathological lies and strategic hype of paranoia porn radio - Search YouTube for video "MYTHBUSTERS confirm carbon dioxide warms the air".
markcgreer 1 year ago
lololol
NeverEndingPromises 1 year ago
oi you fuckin peice of shit remember me? take this fucking joke of a video off you fuckin dog cunt
callum852 1 year ago
So it's just not right to create A BETTER WORLD for nothing?
Jankunas 1 year ago 64
Climate change news for those interested…
.
'Time to work together on climate change'
.
TSIRC Mayor Fred Gela says Council feels isolated in its bid to gain funding to save its communities from the threats of climate change.
.
Edmonton Torres News Australia
13 November 2010
Nightversionn 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
lol i don't give a care whether global warming is rule or isn't theirs more important shit to worry about
but this video is that funny good job who ever made it lol
birdfly43 1 year ago
lol i don't give a care whether global warming is rule or isn't theirs more important shit to worry about
but this video is that fucking funny good job who ever made it lol
birdfly43 1 year ago
lol i don't give a fuck whether global warming is rule or isn't theirs more important shit to worry about
but this video is that fucking funny good job who ever made it lol
birdfly43 1 year ago
References:
"What caused the Little Ice Age?", Crowley, 2001
"Grand minima and maxima of solar activity [...]", Usoskin et al., 2007
"On the effect of a new grand minimum of solar activity on the future climate on Earth", Feulner and Rahmstorf, 2010
"A movable trigger: Fossil fuel CO2 and the onset of the next glaciation", Archer and Ganopolski, 2005
"Earth's Global Energy Budget", Trenberth et al., 2009
"An observationally based energy balance for the Earth since 1950", Murphy et al., 2009
Tervinger 1 year ago 44
@Tervinger So what cause the Medieval Warming Period (MWP) which had warmer temps than today and yet had lower CO2 levels? Unless the MWP can be discredited, the AGW hypothesis fails...
nlpjohn 9 months ago
@nlpjohn The MWP was not a global event. It was warmer in Europe and parts of the North Atlantic, but in other regions, for example in Central Asia and in most parts of the Southern Hemisphere it was cooler. Most of all, it was globally cooler than nowadays.
The MWP was caused by other mechanisms than the current global warming. At the time there was a higher solar radiation and less volcanic activity.
Tervinger 9 months ago
@Tervinger Not a global event? The Medieval Warming Period (MWP) Project has compiled the temp proxy studies around the world and it CLEARLY shows the MWP to be a world-wide event. All the supporting proxy studies can be found on CO2science/org. As for you other claims about volcanos and solar activity, you haven't provided any evidence to support your claims. Science require evidence, not claims...
nlpjohn 9 months ago
@nlpjohn -"you haven't provided any evidence to support your claims"-
Nor have you. That "CO2science/org" website is merely a blog and doesn't provide any peer reviewed publications. It's scientifically irrelevant.
The MWP wasn't a global event. I'll give you some scientific sources in my next comment.
Tervinger 9 months ago
@Tervinger You told me untruth. I went to that site 5 min ago and I saw over 100 peer reviewed papers. The papers are listed by region. You either didn't look or lacked the curiousity to look.
nlpjohn 9 months ago
@nlpjohn You saw a some references that were interpreted by the persons who run that blog, mainly the Idso family. Their reconstructions from the data are completely flawed.
Tervinger 9 months ago
@Tervinger They are flawed because you say so? Science demands proof. Your opinions are irrelevent.
nlpjohn 9 months ago
@nlpjohn "Your opinions are irrelevent."
And so are yours.
I have presented papers that refer to what I've said. You have presented a blog that merely presents an opinion based on misinterpretations of some papers, without presenting a single peer-reviewed publication that would back up the assumptions you have made.
Tervinger 9 months ago
@nlpjohn -"You told me untruth."-
No. There are no papers that support your assumptions.
Tervinger 9 months ago
@Tervinger I WILL QUOTE YOU: "That "CO2science/org" website is merely a blog and doesn't provide any peer reviewed publications." I demonstrated that you made an untrue statement. Now you are moving the goal posts and trying to rewrite history. Just say, 'My bad, I didn't see the reference peer review papers' on this website.' Making up another untruth does not do you any credit.
nlpjohn 9 months ago
@nlpjohn Again: The refernces listed at that website do not refer to your assumptions. The blog owner took data from the papers he listed and misinterpreted them. There are no peer-reviewed papers that show that the MWP was a global event.
Tervinger 9 months ago
@nlpjohn "you made an untrue statement."
Definitely not. That website doesn't provide any papers that would back up your assumptions.
Just say: 'My bad, I didn't see that reference peer review papers' on this website doesn't refer to my statements.'
Tervinger 9 months ago
@nlpjohn
References:
"Highly variable Northern Hemisphere temperatures reconstructed from low- and high-resolution proxy data", Moberg et al., 2005
"Global Signatures and Dynamical Origins of the Little Ice Age and Medieval Climate Anomaly", Mann et al., 2009
"Extensive glaciers in northwest North America during Medieval time", Koch / Clague, 2010 The NOAA merged land air and sea surface temperature dataset (->esrl noaa gov)
Tervinger 9 months ago
@Tervinger Moberg's data shows a MWP. I can't accept MichaelMann as a source. He was a failed PhD student who flucked his orals, who was plucked out of obscurity because of his discredited hockey stick graph. Mann was also part of the "hide the decline" conspiracy. Even warmists Richard Muller and Judith Curry despise Mann. As for the Koch paper it proves nothing. The CO2scienceorg has compiled the peer reviewed which show the MWP to be both a world-wide phenom and warmer than modern temp
nlpjohn 9 months ago
@nlpjohn -"I can't accept MichaelMann as a source"-
What you accept or not is absolutely irrelevant. It is a peer reviewed paper, accepted by the scientific community, and there's no rebuttal of it existing.
Come back when you can present a valid scientific source. As long as you can't do that, I'll ignore your further comments.
Tervinger 9 months ago
@Tervinger Ignore? So what is new? You've continue to ignored the peer review studies used to compile the MWP Project. You can run from debates but the fact remains the same that we sceptics are winning. Don't believe me, look at the polls. Sceptics are the majority in the USA and UK. And the poll trends tell us that Germany will be the next domino to fall. Running away from debates, ignoring FOIA, and "hiding the decline" is what has brought ruin to the cap-and-trade lobby.
nlpjohn 9 months ago
@nlpjohn Your tirades against Michael Mann and "warmists" show that you are not interested in an objective discussion or serious arguments. I further doubt that you understand the scientific aspects of this topic, at least you are not really interested. However, science is not made by webblog propaganda and polls, it is made by research only.
I'm not interested in your political views and rants. Talking to you is futile, a waste of time.
Tervinger 9 months ago
@Tervinger The polls are everything. The people will decide whether we drive in little electric clown cars that need $15,000 worth of batteries replaced every 5 years. The people will decide whether we implement a CO2 cap-and-tax plan. As for your accusations, you have proven you lacked the curiousity to study the MWP Project's data so your accusations that I lack the interest to understand the scientific aspects ring a bit hollow in my ears...
nlpjohn 9 months ago
@nlpjohn You are not a sceptic, you are an AGW-denier. Real sceptics do serious research and are also skeptic towards their own views. Science is not a case of winning debates and polls, and it is not made by the opinion of laymen.
No one doubts that the papers listed at the "CO2 Science" website are valid. They took some data from those papers, but the conclusions which are made from it are not peer-reviewed, and not part of those papers. It's merely propaganda in disguise of science.
MaluronLurette 9 months ago
@MaluronLurette Actually winning the polls is everything. It is the common people that will decide whether a CO2 cap-and-tax plan is implemented. And to be a scientist you must follow the scientific method. And the scientific method involves the COMPLETE publication of data/methodology. In the USA, alarmists regularly denying FOIA (freedom of information act) requests from sceptics seeking details. No where in the scientific method is "peer review" a requirement. I'm on the side of science.
nlpjohn 9 months ago
@nlpjohn "winning the polls is everything"
A poll doesn't change the scientific facts and taxes are a political matter, and not subject of natural science. You can also make a poll if people believe in gravity or not, and in Kansas you would perhaps even get a majority of disbelievers but that will not stop things from falling down.
MaluronLurette 9 months ago
@MaluronLurette Everything you say about polls is true however it does not change the fact that it will be voters that determine the proper course of action. There have been clear perversions of science with regard to the AGW hypothesis. Failure to follow the scientific method (providing COMPLETE methodologies and data sets) and the perversion of the "peer review" process to exclude studies based on their findings. The scandals have changed public opinions in both the USA/UK.
nlpjohn 9 months ago
@nlpjohn "that determine the proper course of action"
But again, that doesn't change the facts. If it contradicts the facts, it will be the wrong course of action, no matter if it was decided by the majority; democracy is not infallible.
"There have been clear perversions of science"
Only in the fantasy of some conspiracy therorists.
"the AGW hypothesis."
LOL. It's not a hypothesis, it is an observable, measurable and explainable phenomenon.
MaluronLurette 9 months ago
@MaluronLurette Conspiracy theorists comprise perhaps 5% of the population. However, sceptics are the majority in the USA/UK. The last Der Spiegel poll shows German sceptics headed to the majority as well. You can call the majority of the people conspiracy theorists but it won't make the AGW scandals go away. Your lack of curiousity to other view points will insure your mind will not be easily changed. Oh well I tried... Thank you for the debate but I believe we have reached an impass.
nlpjohn 9 months ago
@nlpjohn "skeptics are the majority in the USA/UK"
You need an advanced knowledge on a topic to become a serious skeptic and a personal disbelief is not sufficient. These "skeptics" aren't experts, they usually deny AGW because of personal reasons and political motives, like the fear to pay higher taxes.
"You can call the majority of the people conspiracy theorists"
Only the ones who publish the propaganda. The others are merely fools who believe what they want to believe.
MaluronLurette 9 months ago
@MaluronLurette Got to surfacestations/org to see the audits of US surface temp stations. The pictures of faulty temp stations alone makes this site worthy of a visit. 69% of US temp stations have errors of 1 degree C or greater. The temp data from 3rd world nations are even worse. And there are accusations of data manipulation in the USA. The opinion polls in the USA/UK did not magically change by themselves. The credit belongs w/ the many AGW scandals that were discovered.
nlpjohn 9 months ago
@nlpjohn "Got to surfacestations/org"
I'm not interested in propaganda websites. I prefer first hand data.
"The opinion polls in the USA/UK did not magically change"
Indeed. It changed because of propaganda and the ignorance of the people.
That is exactly the reason why science is not made by polls and opinion of laymen, but by research of experts. And more than 97% of all climate experts worldwide aggree that humans are causing the climate to change.
MaluronLurette 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@nlpjohn BTW, do you know the difference between global warming and climate change?
MaluronLurette 9 months ago
@nlpjohn "In the USA, alarmists regularly denying FOIA (freedom of information act) requests from sceptics seeking details"
Pure propaganda. Actually, all data is published.
"No where in the scientific method is "peer review" a requirement. "
Peer review is only ONE (but very successful) restriction to guarantee that publications respect the scientific method and to avoid a flood of pseudoscience. A lot of stuff that failed peer-review is nevertheless published, however only to fail again.
MaluronLurette 9 months ago
@nlpjohn "warmists Richard Muller"
Muller a "warmist"? LOL. He intentionally misquoted that (in)famous email only to discredit Mann. In the original email you can see that the 'hide the decline' comment didn't refer to Mann's work, but to Keith Briffa's, and that in a different context.
"Mann was also part of the "hide the decline" conspiracy"
Have you ever read one of Mann's papers? Then explain what he has allegedly hidden. LOL, he even gave an internet link to the raw data he used.
MaluronLurette 9 months ago
@MaluronLurette Your facts are incorrect. Michael Mann also used "the trick" where data after 1960 that had an alleged "divergence" problem was ommitted from the graphs. I have the Mann et al graphs to prove it. That alone was a seedy technique but they plotted the thermometer readings for 1960+ and used mathematical smoothing to give the illusion that there was one continuous graph through 1960. On Stephen McIntyre's site climateaudit/org he details Mann's transgressions in great detail.
nlpjohn 9 months ago
@nlpjohn That was not what I was talking about. I referred to Muller intentionally misquoting Phil Jones' email.
However, "Mike's trick" refers to a technique used by Mann to plot instrumental temperature data on the same graph as the reconstructed data over the past millennium. In his graphs everything was labelled properly and nothing was hidden.
The "decline" does not refer to global temperature but to a decline in tree growth at certain high-latitude locations, mentioned in Briffa's paper.
MaluronLurette 9 months ago
@MaluronLurette His graphs certainly did ***NOT*** labled as you describe. Warmist Dr Judith Curry was also fooled by the "nature's trick". And the tree ring data after 1960 did show a temp decline. And since when is it scientific to fuse two different data sets together using mathematical smoothing? There was no reason to include thermometer readings just for 1960+ unless the purpose was to hide contrary data.
nlpjohn 9 months ago
@nlpjohn "His graphs certainly did ***NOT*** labled as you describe."
Of course they are. Perhaps you shouldn't use the manipulated graph from your propaganda website.
I highly doubt that you ever read or even understood that paper. You exactly parrot what is said at those websites. Mann's paper was peer-reviewed and it is accepted by the scientific community. There's also a new one existing where he specified a lot of points. Further, his results have been confirmed by various new papers.
MaluronLurette 9 months ago
@nlpjohn "And since when is it scientific to fuse two different data sets together using mathematical smoothing?" -
Your claims are utter nonsense. The chart shows three different graphs, all properly labelled. Two reconstructions, and one from instrumental data. Nothing is fused together. Mann even added the uncertainty range, showing an increasing uncertainty as the reconstructions go further back in time.
Tervinger 9 months ago
@Tervinger Then you are not looking at the same graph as I. Dr Richard Muller (Berkley) made a youtube presentation of Mann's attempt to deceive him and other scientists. Perhaps you should watch Muller's presentation. Despite Mann's shenigans, Muller still believes the AGW hypothesis is valid (though I do not). If Muller's presentation fails to make an impression then I doubt I can do better and we are best ending this debate now...
nlpjohn 9 months ago
@nlpjohn "Then you are not looking at the same graph as I"-
You obviously look at a manipulated one from one of your propaganda blogs.
"we are best ending this debate now"-
There never really was a debate. It was merely "exposing denialist nonsense", haven't you realized that?
Tervinger 9 months ago 4
@Tervinger Your response is a clear illustration why climate alarmists have been getting killed in public polls. You show no curiousity in those who challenge the AGW hypothesis. Smug comments and ignoring counter arguments might be red meat for your fellow AGW "true believers" but the public has a low opinion of such tactics. Ignoring challenges to the AGW hypothesis has been a losing strategy. Such myopia will guarantee that the AGW political movement will fail. You are your own worst enemy
nlpjohn 9 months ago
@nlpjohn You still don't get it. Neither polls nor this "debate", or any debate is relevant. Science is neither made by debates nor by polls, it is made by research ONLY. The public opinion is worth a shit and will not change scientific facts. I don't care for polls, or if the USA will raise taxes or not, or whatever like that.
"ignoring counter arguments" -
You haven't presented a single valid argument. All you do is ranting and defaming scientists, while you dodge all scientific facts.
Tervinger 9 months ago 2
@Tervinger You are repeating points you have made earlier. Refer to my previous response. You can't claim to be on the side of science while dodging counter arguments to a proposed hypothsis. But in the end your opinion or my opinion does not matter. It will be the tax paying public that decides the validity of the AGW hypothesis and whether to fund CO2 cap and tax plans...
nlpjohn 9 months ago
@nlpjohn You said: "the tax paying public that decides the validity of the AGW" -nope it was scientists and evidence who decide the most likely validity, whether the public takes notice or not is another matter.
checkyoursources 8 months ago
@nlpjohn See: Global warming estimates, media expectations...William R. Freudenburg (2010) "The findings indicate that supposed challenges to the science on global warming need to be subjected to greater scrutiny,if reporters wish to discuss ‘‘both sides’’ of the climate issue, the scientifically legitimate ‘‘other side’’ is that, if anything, global climate disruption may prove to be significantly worse than has been suggested in scientific estimates to date.
checkyoursources 8 months ago 32
@nlpjohn The following papers rebut McIntyre's claims / confirm Mann's results:
"Robustness of the Mann, Bradley, Hughes reconstruction of Northern Hemisphere surface temperatures[...]", Wahl / Ammann, 2007;
"Temperature trends over the past five centuries reconstructed from borehole temperatures", Huang et al., 2000;
"Reconstructing hemispheric-scale climates from multiple stalagmite records", Smith et al., 2006;
"Extracting a Climate Signal from 169 Glacier Records", Oerlemanns, 2005
MaluronLurette 9 months ago
@MaluronLurette None of these papers address Mann using computer code to over-weight some data and under-weight other data. Stephen McIntyre was able to recreate the "hockey stick" graph using random data. You are defending the indefensible... Michael Mann is a charleton. But perhaps I'm being too harsh. Mann has done more for the AGW sceptic cause than anyone else. Including Keith Briffa and Phil Jones.
nlpjohn 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@nlpjohn "None of these papers address Mann using computer code to over-weight some data and under-weight other data."
LOL. Because Mann never did something like that.
You NEVER have read the paper yourself, that is obvious. You poorly try to impersonate an expert to judge a scientific publication although you don't even understand the first sentence in the abstract.
Again, do you even know the difference between climate change and global warming?
MaluronLurette 9 months ago
@nlpjohn "None of these papers address Mann" -
The papers from Huang, Smith and Oerlemanns are using different methods, reconstructions from data taken from boreholes, stalagmites and glaciers which all came to the same result, confirming Mann's results.
Wahl's paper is an independent reconstruction of the data, and he got the same results as Mann.
In his new paper (2008), Mann added several new reconstuctions made with different methods which confirm his previous results.
Tervinger 9 months ago
@Tervinger Oh? They used computer code to eliminate "noise" data like Mann? Some people call this cherry-picking the data. I think your debate strategy to defend Mann is a losing strategy. Many fellow warmists treat Mann like a leper that he truly is. If your local library has the book, "The Hockey Stick Illusion" by Andrew Montford, and you are curious, I would read that book. The book details Mann's deception in far more detail than I could.
nlpjohn 9 months ago
@nlpjohn I've just checked the "hockey stick" graph from Mann's 1999 again. Instrumental data and reconstructions are clearly seperated and labelled correctly , there is no such 'illusion' you are talking about, and no 'seedy technique' has been used. Well, at least not to people who have the scientific knowledge to understand the graph. Mann gives all the information how he came to these results and he gives a link to the raw data he used. No seedy tricks, no hidden information, no decline.
MaluronLurette 9 months ago
@MaluronLurette And I check Mann's graph on wikipedia and no where on the graph does it say that thermometer readings from 1960+ were included on his graph or that tree ring data from 1960+ was ommitted. The simply truth is you do not know the facts...
nlpjohn 9 months ago
@nlpjohn "The simply truth is you do not know the facts..."
Facts? You actually mean "propaganda".
C'mon, you got your ass handed back to you and you know that. Your poor attempts to dodge the arguments simply by parroting those propaganda websites again and again are ridiculous.
Mann's papers are a valid scientific source, highly accepted by the scientific community, and you will not change that. Now THAT is a fact. Discussion over.
MaluronLurette 9 months ago
@MaluronLurette My ass feels quite well. And I am content that you think Michael Mann's work is valid. I'm in good company w/ Dr Richard Muller, Dr Judith Curry, and many others who think Mann is an unscupulous fraud. Meanwhile I will sip a lemonade and wait for the latest Der Spiegel polls showing Germany joining the sceptic community. Victory over the AGW debate will occur in the polls...not in a youtube debate.
nlpjohn 9 months ago
@nlpjohn "Der Spiegel polls showing Germany joining the sceptic community"-
LOL. The Green party currently would get 24% in an election. It is even quite probable that the next German chancellor will be from the "warmist" party #1.
And no, I don't want to discuss this point, nor do I sympathise with that party. It's only FYI.
Alright, this time I mean it, I'll leave this 'debate'. All is said.
Tervinger 9 months ago 37
(II) [...] It's true that solar activity is slightly decreasing (disproving the common argument, that solar activity would cause the current global warming). But even if we would face a new Maunder minimum, the CO2 effect is too strong and we would merely observe a less accelerated warming. BTW, the current short term cooling is caused by the thermal transfer between the atmosphere and the oceans. The total heat content is still growing, means that there's still global warming.[...]
Tervinger 1 year ago
(i) Funny video. But we are not heading into a new ice age. The warming effect of an increased (and still increasing) level of CO2 exceeds cooling effects of other factors, such as solar activity or earth orbit and axial tilt.
The 'Little Ice Age' that was mentioned in the vid was caused by a lower solar activity (the Maunder minimum) combined with high volcanic activity.[...]
Tervinger 1 year ago 4
Ale Gore's right hand man that came up with Globle Warming has now said we are headed for 30 yr. of Globle COOLING ! WOW GLOBLE COOLING !
turtle4aire 1 year ago
@turtle4aire That is baloney. I take it we have yet another sock puppet denier. Man's burning of fossil fuels caused changes in the physical world, temperature increase. Gore is not some magician that can magically change nature.
.
Science is telling us what is happening.
.
What an oil troll. And by the way, do you have any sources to back up your childish baloney. I'll be waiting
Nightversionn 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
DONT READ THIS CAUSE IT REALLY WORKS.YOU WILL GET KISSED ON THE NEAREST POSSIBLE FRIDAY BY THE LOVE OF UR LIFE.TOMORROW WILL BE THE BEST DAY OF YOUR LIFE.HOWEVER IF YOU DONT POST THIS COMMENT TO AT LEAST 3 VIDEOS OR YOU WILL DIE WITHIN 2 DAYS.NOW UV STARTED READIN DIS DUNT STOP THIS IS SO SCARY.SEND THIS OVER TO 5 VIDEOS IN 143 MINUTES WHEN UR DONE PRESS F6 AND UR CRUSHES NAME WILL APPEAR ON THE SCREEN IN BIG LETTERS.THIS IS SO SCARY BUT REALLY WORKS
mcpimp2 1 year ago
Climate news..
.
World Bank pressured over record fossil fuels lending
.
With new figures showing a record amount of World Bank funding for projects relying on coal power and other fossil fuels, the issue of reforming the institution's energy lending was once again a hot topic at the World Bank and IMF annual meetings, which concluded over the weekend.
.
Inter Press Service
13 October 2010
Nightversionn 1 year ago
Randomlaughingman removed her comment on random, (not before I caught it haha) after she realized others seeing the same stupid rhymes would realize the two freaks were really one.
How's this "TheRandomElasticJesusLaughingMPDfreak"
Check it out here v=lGLc8b4ho_o
One rhyming idiot, pretending to be two
Dayversion 1 year ago
@Dayversion Jeezus, put down the drugs while you still can dude
Nightversionn 1 year ago
Dayversion 1 year ago
@randomlaughingman
This whole debate is hillarious.
Feyversion reckons oil companies invented global warming in league with Al Gore and Goldman Sachs.
Mayversion reckons Oil and coal are innocent
Shiteversion uses the argument 100ppm CO2 is irrelevant though he'd refuse to swallow the same % rise in Botulism
Twatversion reckons its the sun even though we're only just pulling out of a solar minimum.
Evilversion uses morality while ignoring the RF dispossessed
?????
TheElasticJesus 1 day ago
Dayversion 1 year ago
Climate change in the news…
.
Slow progress at latest climate talk
.
Massive rainfall causing floods narrowly missed the climate change negotiators who met for another round of talks in Tianjin last week, with rather disappointing results.
.
Petaling Jaya Star, Malaysia
11 October 2010
Nightversionn 1 year ago