Official Global Warming thread (merged)

[Orangeslice13]

Hollywood drives the global warming agenda for ideological purposes.
The left govenment does it for political purposes.
The UN does it for wealth redistribution and control.
The super rich do it for money.
Every corrupted piece of crap has their hands on this scam.

Sad but true

 

[Sandvol]

UAH atmospheric temperatures prove climate models and/or surface temperature data sets are wrong

There's nothing wrong with NOAA's data, despite their hooting and hollering over 'adjustments'. Note that several 'adjustments' have been made to the UAH analyses as well. SandVol is just cherrypicking the data that best fits his narrative.

And even then, he still has to cherrypick a time frame to hide the obvious trend.

This is from NOAA's web site. Five tenths of the six tenths rise from 1900 to 2000 is due to "adjustments." Call me skeptical.

 

[BigOrangeTrain]

So according to Bart if you are the least bit skeptical about "climate change" then you're a denialist and conspiracy theory nut. And he claims to be a scientist lol:

 

[BartW]

This is from NOAA's web site. Five tenths of the six tenths rise from 1900 to 2000 is due to "adjustments." Call me skeptical.

You are not worthy of the term ‘skeptical’.

If accurate (link?), you’re still cherrypicking the contiguous United States. Trout just thoroughly addressed this talking point again here and here. Let me reiterate the conclusion:

let's say you still think this is all bull****. I just showed you the net difference is .02 degrees C. It doesn't change the trend or situation.

 

[BartW]

So according to Bart if you are the least bit skeptical about "climate change" then you're a denialist and conspiracy theory nut. And he claims to be a scientist lol:

Dude, you've even argued the HAARP conspiracy theory in this thread. Some of you are conspiracy nuts irrespective of your stance on climate change.

 

[BartW]

UN Warns World Could Have 40 Percent Water Shortfall by 2030

19 Reasons California’s Drought Isn’t A Big Deal

 

[508mikey]

UN Warns World Could Have 40 Percent Water Shortfall by 2030

19 Reasons California’s Drought Isn’t A Big Deal

I see you are back --- just like the cold weather here

 

[Sandvol]

You are not worthy of the term ‘skeptical’.

Who is? Obviously not Spencer, Singer, Lindzen or anyone else according to you.

If accurate (link?), you’re still cherrypicking the contiguous United States. Trout just thoroughly addressed this talking point again here and here. Let me reiterate the conclusion:

"It is not a conspiracy. Trust us."

 

[Sandvol]

You are not worthy of the term ‘skeptical’.

If accurate (link?), you’re still cherrypicking the contiguous United States. Trout just thoroughly addressed this talking point again here and here. Let me reiterate the conclusion:

Cherry picking US data? OK, here is the adjusted data from Puerto Casado Paraguay:

 

[82_VOL_83]

So according to Bart if you are the least bit skeptical about "climate change" then you're a denialist and conspiracy theory nut. And he claims to be a scientist lol:

Like I said......throw out one piece of data or one fact and extrapolate the end of the world. That is how this crap works.

 

[Danl]

Cherry picking US data? OK, here is the adjusted data from Puerto Casado Paraguay:

Why are you posting charts of localized data (Puerta Casado?) rather than global data?

Are we discussing Paraguayan Warming or global warming?

 

[Sandvol]

Why are you posting charts of localized data (Puerta Casado?) rather than global data?

Like what?

Are we discussing Paraguayan Warming or global warming?

Isn't Paraguay part of the globe? Bart said I was cherry picking US data so isn't it reasonable to pick some other place like Paraguayan data?

 

[Jxn Vol]

Since Al Gore's carbon footprint is larger than a small town why don't we start with him? If he truly thought there was a crisis he would scale back. Also if he thought the oceans would rise he would not have bought a mansion on the coast.

Follow the money trail.

 

[FLVOL_79]

Guys we should be thankful that in these dire times of man made catastrophic global warming climate change that we get to wake up everyday. Here is to hoping that the world doesn't end after I go to sleep tonight..

 

[Sandvol]

The problem is that with Bart and his activist friends it is not about the science or the truth it is about the agenda and winning the debate.

“He who controls the past controls the future. He who controls the present controls the past.”

― George Orwell, 1984

 

[BartW]

The problem is that with Bart and his activist friends it is not about the science or the truth it is about the agenda and winning the debate.

“He who controls the past controls the future. He who controls the present controls the past.”

― George Orwell, 1984

Ironic coming from you who just called Florida's Orwellian gag order on climate change "brilliant"

 

[BartW]

Why are you posting charts of localized data (Puerta Casado?) rather than global data?

Are we discussing Paraguayan Warming or global warming?

He probably picked Paraguay because of the Telegraph article about the 'greatest scandal evar' which recently recycled this old denialist talking point.

 

[FLVOL_79]

I find it hard to argue with Bart seeing as he is a big dutch soccer supporter as am I..well at least according to his avatar.

 

[Sandvol]

He probably picked Paraguay because of the Telegraph article about the 'greatest scandal evar' which recently recycled this old denialist talking point.

It's called truth Bart. Something you nor your cronies are interested in.

 

[Danl]

Like what?

Like global data. Do you understand the concept of "global"?

Isn't Paraguay part of the globe?

Yes, it is. A tiny, tiny part. What about the rest of the globe?

Bart said I was cherry picking US data so isn't it reasonable to pick some other place like Paraguayan data?

No. That's just obvious cherry picking. Really obvious. Why not use global rather than local data? Shouldn't your argument(s) be strengthened by global data? If not, why not?

 

[Sandvol]

No. That's just obvious cherry picking. Really obvious. Why not use global rather than local data? Shouldn't your argument(s) be strengthened by global data? If not, why not?

If you can point out to me where the global thermometer is I'm sure I can show you where the data has been adjusted.

 

[Sandvol]

No. That's just obvious cherry picking. Really obvious. Why not use global rather than local data? Shouldn't your argument(s) be strengthened by global data? If not, why not?

If you can point out to me where the global thermometer is I'm sure I can find where the data has been adjusted.

 

[Danl]

If you can point out to me where the global thermometer is I'm sure I can find where the data has been adjusted.

Didn't someone recently post the global data, with and without adjustments? Why don't you use those data?

 

[BartW]

Didn't someone recently post the global data, with and without adjustments? Why don't you use those data?

.

From my link, here is the adjusted vs raw global temperature data:

First adjusted

Second raw

Please note that the raw data, adjusted data, and adjustment procedure are all accessible on the web and have links on that page so you can confirm all of this.

 

[BartW]

Reposting this article, why not

Climate Denial Food Chain: Conservative Media Run With Baseless Climate Science Conspiracy Theory

NOAA's Temperature Adjustments Are Necessary, Peer-Reviewed, And Well-Documented. In a statement to Media Matters, The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) said that adjustments to the temperature record are necessary to "account for a variety of non-climate related" factors and are validated by "numerous peer-reviewed studies":

[N]umerous peer-reviewed studies continue to find that NOAA's temperature record is reliable. To ensure accuracy of the record, scientists use peer-reviewed methods called homogenization, to adjust temperature readings to account for a variety of non-climate related affects such as changes in station location, changes in observation methods, changes in instrumentation such as thermometers, and the growth of urban heat islands that occur through time. Such changes in observing systems cause false shifts in temperature readings. Paraguay is one example of where these false shifts artificially lower the true station temperature trend. However, around the world, the opposite is true a little less than half of the time (see Lawrimore, et al, 2011). Homogenization methods take out these false shifts. [Email to Media Matters, 2/10/15]

NOAA: Largest Adjustment "Actually Lowers Global Temperature Trends." Contrary to Booker's claim that NOAA and NASA make temperature adjustments to exaggerate the amount of warming, in their statement to Media Matters, NOAA noted that the largest temperature adjustment is made "over the oceans," which "actually lowers global temperature trends":

It is important to keep in mind that the largest adjustment in the global surface temperature record occurs over the oceans. Adjustments to account for the transition in sea surface temperature observing methods actually lowers global temperature trends (see Huang, et al, 2015). [Email to Media Matters, 2/10/15]

Ars Technica: Booker's Claims Based On Cherry-Picked Data. Ars Technica's science editor John Timmer similarly affirmed the baselessness of Booker's claims in a February 9 article, explaining that temperature records "have to be processed" to account for a variety of legitimate factors, but that "[t]o the more conspiracy minded, you can replace 'processed' with 'fraudulently manipulated to make it look warmer.'" Timmer added that Booker's claims are "based on a few posts by a blogger who has gone around cherry picking a handful of temperature stations":

We knew this already; we knew it two years ago when Fox published its misguided piece. But our knowledge hasn't stopped Booker from writing two columns using hyped terms like "scandal" and claiming the public's being "tricked by flawed data on global warming." All of this based on a few posts by a blogger who has gone around cherry picking a handful of temperature stations and claiming the adjustments have led to a warming bias. [Ars Technica, 2/9/15]