This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
It's Getting Hot In Here: 2012 Hottest Year On Record
2012 was a historic year for extreme weather that included drought, wildfires, hurricanes and storms. But, as NOAA reported yesterday, 2012 marked the warmest year on record for the contiguous United States. The average temperature for 2012 was 55.3°F, 3.2°F above the 20th century average, and 1.0°F above 1998, the previous warmest year. Rainfall was dismal also at 26.57 inches, 2.57 inches below average, making it the 15th driest year on record for the nation. NOAA also adds that the U.S. Climate Extremes Index indicated that 2012 was the second most extreme year on record for the nation, nearly twice the average value and second only to 1998. 2012 saw 11 disasters that reached the $1 billion threshold in losses. Climate Central also confirms that fully two-thirds of the lower 48 states recorded their first-, second- or third-hottest years, and 43 states had one of their top 10 warmest years ever recorded. Globally, 2012 appears to be the eight warmest on record.
Hottest Year on Record
And one of the driest (least precipitation) on record...
With very significant events everywhere...
but it's not just the US, the world saw extreme weather everywhere...
Source: NOAA and Climate Central
»
- 17424 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
And pray tell how do those new fancy gizmos work? You seem to think that they get it right by magic...
I also suggest you acquaint yourself with the basics of measuement theory and error analysis....
Mercury doesn't lie.
I heard that today's thermometers are all made by a European subsidiary of an old Soviet multinational weapons manufacturer which is today run by a gay, French, Muslim, Hollywood philanthropist.
Makes you wonder.
People do !
Several things that are very clear from the fossil and geological record; The planet warms and cools, species come and go, and that which cannot be sustained, won't be. Same as it ever was.
im goingto choose to ignore your argument based on physics and simply run around shouting science while i tell people the sky is falling
and this will be a great distraction from all the very real problems caused by the giant NWO multinationals who poisoned the planet to begin with out of forced scarcity and avarice
letting the days go by
I would just like to submit this additional scientific point:
it's not that variation, it's the sudden rate and coincidence with very unique moden "human" activities in a closed system. It's really not that complex
The future of human civilization is not actually a subject of natural fluctuation. We made it in the first place, we maintain it, we would like to keep it, and each generation should display some interest in not destroying it.
It just seems really heartless to give up so easily just because dinosaurs were wiped out by an asteroid sometime when.
its the most GMO and NWO year on record
with highs in the upper Tyranny
Without even researching it, you can bet that, just as with most politically correct data, the claim that 2012 is the hottest year ever is leaving out critical variables and is also fudging the data. Let's check.
First, this was the 9th hottest year in the last 34 according to satellite data. The discrepancy is because the data only considers the continental US.
Also, the data for the US was fudged.
i am going to yell conspiracy theory as loud as possible and hope no one notices the inescapable logic of your statements (sarcasm)
Not sure about "fudged". Your link states that there are two databases with different numbers. I suspect there are actually dozens of different databases. The question is whether any of them refute the conclusion that 2012 was the "hottest year on record" in the U.S. If all those databases support that conclusion, the fact that they have different numbers is irrelevant.
So it appears that one of the two databases reports a temperature for July 2012 that is slightly below the historical July 1936 temperature, while the other database reports a temperature above the July 1936 temperature. NOAA must think the latter is a better database, for some reason hopefully related to science.
2012 Heat is Latest Politically Correct "science"
Everyone is supposed to know that 2012 was the hottest year ever. It was in all the news (as demonstrated by P. J. Gladnick):
The NYT knows its readers well, and the NYT is pretty confident that its readers won’t bother asking whether this was a regional phenomenon or a global one or whether the temperature data could have been fudged – again. Whereas, the independent thinker will have been immediately suspicious because most other politically correct “scientific” conclusions have proven to cherry pick the data and then fudge the remaining data – especially climate “science”.
First, this was the 9th hottest year in the last 34 according to satellite data. The discrepancy is because the alarmist data only considers the continental US.
Also, the data for the US was fudged.
Well, that was easy. The 2012 heat is just more politically correct junk science.
The 2012 heat reminds me of the hockey stick chart, whose falsification became know as Climategate. The hockey stick chart was never real science. It was created by only one “scientist” – Michael Mann, and it was accepted without being scientifically reproduced by real scientists. He created algorithms designed to produce a hockey stick chart. He created a single new data sample and ignored all the existing and contradictory data samples. When temperatures in his new data sample actually went down at end instead of up, Michael Mann decided to “hide the decline” by replacing that segment of his data with other data that went the direction he needed. When two non-scientists tried to reproduce his results, he not only refused to cooperate, but he and his accomplices decided to change the definition of peer review if necessary to stop them from getting published. Emails
Most politically correct “science” doesn’t even pass the smell test. For example:
So called “liberals” are no longer interest in freedom and tolerance. Instead, everyone must be the same, everyone must believe the same, and everyone must be controlled. Even your carbon footprint must be controlled – which requires a global government, of course. Some may call this liberalism, political correctness, progressivism, socialism, globalism, collectivism, or communism, but it is always – fascism.
"Without even researching it"
Always the better approach.
OMG it flooded in Duluth, it was cold in Alaska, and California had fires?!?
No.fucking.way.
Also, natural disaters cost less than bad monetary policy.
bad monetary policy takes less geological time to correct and it's hard to barter with mother nature.
And money is more exciting that ice melt and less threatening than entire continents on fire.
When in doubt you gotta keep with your comfort zone.
WTF ? Every 10 seconds there is some new "billion dollar disaster".
I saw a fender bender in the grocery store parking lot last week. How long will it be before such accidents are also in the $Billions ?
The Federal Government is a $Billion disaster every 10 seconds all by itself !
"Every 10 seconds there is some new "billion dollar disaster". "
Yes and the insurers are starting to take notice. You don't live inside any red-lined regions, do you? Or if you do you don't mind not being insured, right?
There is strong suspicion that NOAA and other agencies are cherry-picking data for political purposes.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/01/06/does-noaas-national-climatic-data-...
NOAA is as reliable as the University of East Anglia (UEA) #ClimateGate
:3
Suspect all you like. Everyone needs a hobby.
I'm willing to wear a lab coat and look worried.
How much does the gig pay?
The pay is pretty crappy given the skill set required...
Reading a thermometer and keying it into a spreadsheet?
Slow down, Einstein.
Ever do a Principal Component Analysis?
Depends on whether your "science" is consensus based, or whether it utilizes traditional scientific method.
(FYI, the former pays MUCH better)
Well if you can publish for peer-review a significant new synthesis of climate data that refutes 50 years of work in the field, it's worth a Nobel Prize (or three) and a very lucrative new career on the speaking circuit.
I'm not even joking. Simple fact. So do it.
Go ahead. Visit every denier website out there, gather all the data and methods into one publication, and be set for life.
Serious, just do it. Or get Watts to do it. Or Heartland Institute, someone with big bucks.
No I really mean it. I want to see it. I want you to do it. Nobel Prize, in the bag. Millions in speaking fees.
Go at it. Jump. Jump you stupid fucking monkey! DO IT!
You mean like India did in 2009 when they proved that there is, in fact, water on the moon (lots of it), disproving everything NASA ever said on the subject?
No thanks. I'm not that ambitious. Besides India didn't get a Nobel for proving that NASA's a bunch of idiots, did they?
Nope, proving that fucktards like you never knew your ass from your elbow in the first place because your textbooks were head-up-your-ass wrong isn't on my agenda. I just want an easy, government-sponsored gig with a generous retirement package. You know, a bobble-head job. Was that not clear?
So does that mean you are not going to do it?
Now I'm disappointed. You had me really inspired there for a minute.
One year does not a trend make. But just in case, let's all move to Alaska which has cooled 3 degrees over the last decade.
is that the place connected to the circle that is melting into ocean? How are the glaciers doing....all over?
3 degrees cooler... as the ice thawing drops ocean current temp. You ever fish there on the Bering? I did. Seen it, saw it, and watched it... the temperatures. All f*** up.
"One year does not a trend make."
Okay that is just about the stupidest thing anyone has ever said, anywhere, about anything. Of course it doesn't, one point does not even establish a line. My 12 yo kid knows that. Jeezuz Christ on a crutch.
Oh and I got another news flash: a dozen points on a line does not make an interesting trend if there is too much noise in the data.
So it's a good thing all these trend-y things are calculated on centuries (and sometimes, eons) of data with proper statistical confidence limits.
I know, math hurtz your brainz.
Have they bothered to move any of the data collection points on asphalt or concrete?
The aggregators of the data are taught the same "smoothing" techniques that the BLS, BEA, CBO, and other statistical propangandist deploy.
This discussion is like a crappy song on a KISS record that's stuck and you just keeping hearing it over, and over, and over, and over.
It never changes - always the same grating, annoying, repetitive thing.
I'm old enough that I owned KISS records.
Side 3 of Double Platinum was pretty grating.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kNGNLo8K6Fk
Precisely.
Takes me back to my high school buddy's 1972 Ford LTD and the 8 track player he had mounted under the dash.
And did you have a matchbook or a butter knife to jam in to keep it from warbling?
doubled up paperclip that you could slide on and off them worked quite well.
NOAA reported U.S. temperature data is 100% a result of "adjustments" and data manipulation. While ad hominem attacks attacks Anthony Watts yields zero substantive arguments, it is factual to say Tom Karl, head of NCDC which compiles and reports these data, falsely claimed on his resume to have a PhD.
http://web.archive.org/web/20070207131147/http://www.jhu.edu/~climate/th...
Flakmeister, there is no doubt NOAA has been fiddling with the data for quite some time; cooling the past and warming the present.
Even Met O cannot hide from the truth that the world hasn't warmed as advertised to the point of revising their failed predictions with new and improved climate model (the Holy Relic of Warmologists everywhere) predictions. 25 years of fearmongering flushed down the shitter.
http://hockeyschtick.blogspot.com/2013/01/uk-met-office-cuts-projected-2...
Get over it AGW nutbags, the world hasn't warmed for 16+ years.
You are delusional...
You could easily get a job in the Central Valley given your obvious cherry picking skills...
Source http://skepticalscience.com/trend.php using GISTEMP and 12 month MA
John Cook routinely deletes and censors posts, not to mention "edits" their OP as required when put in a bad light. A motley crew they are. References available upon request. SkS is a complete joke.
Nonetheless, here is an analysis using YOUR SkS source link. ROFL.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/01/06/crowdsourcing-a-temperature-trend-...
Results:
For RSS the warming is NOT significant for 23 years.
For RSS: +0.130 +/-0.136 C/decade at the two sigma level from 1990
For UAH, the warming is NOT significant for 19 years.
For UAH: 0.143 +/- 0.173 C/decade at the two sigma level from 1994
For Hacrut3, the warming is NOT significant for 19 years.
For Hadcrut3: 0.098 +/- 0.113 C/decade at the two sigma level from 1994
For Hacrut4, the warming is NOT significant for 18 years.
For Hadcrut4: 0.098 +/- 0.111 C/decade at the two sigma level from 1995
For GISS, the warming is NOT significant for 17 years.
For GISS: 0.113 +/- 0.122 C/decade at the two sigma level from 1996
Can you demonstrate how you arrived at those numbers...
You should understand what a null hypothesis and statistically signifigance are... You clearly don't...
I can assure you that if the data could be used to say that the hypothesis that global warming could be rejected at the 95% C.L. the conclusions of climate scientists would be very different...
Playing semantics and cherry picking are not science...
Jane you ignorant slut.
I provided a link to the data source. If you can't figure out how to use the tools KNMI provides, that's your problem. If you think the data I posted is incorrect, then correct it. There was no cherry picking. The longitude and latitude in the graphs are for the North Atlantic and Pacific. Both regions are losing heat, period.
Actually I know what a null hypothesis and statistical significance is. I also know removing uncertainty from data is very important. That you cannot do your own homework and show me where I erred speaks volumes.
There is also the slight problem with the missing hot spot in the tropical troposphere according to AGW "theory", but I wouldn't expect you to know the history behind that.
I also know Appeal to Authority is not science.
Well if you *knew* that, you would not be fooled by such a blatant mispresentation of the data...
Only a liar would fit trends with unaveraged monthly data... Why don;t you compute 24 trends generated by shifting the base line 12 months back and 12 months forward and comment on the spread, moreover, also take notice which one gave the desired result..
The games you describe are those used by con artists to decieve to unwitting...
If anyone tried to publish those trend fits and make claims based on them they would be laughed at and the manuscript would be returned with a big bold REJECTED stamped on it...
"Playing semantics and cherry picking are not science..."
You're right, executing a globalist anti-human agenda with computer models manipulated using cherry-picked data while ignoring patent paleoclimatology to produce desired outcomes of absolute BS, conjecture and contrived doom that is altered by "scientists" so often the very name of the "phenomenon" needs to be changed and rebranded to suit the utter and continual failure is "science".
Quite the fucking clown show you worship.
Do you have anything of scientific consequence to add or just paranoid induced ramblings of a fool?
"the world hasn't warmed for 16+ years"
This statement is not supported by the data.
All the globally hottest years on record have been in the last 10 years. And I predict this year will continue that trend.
Okay that isn't exactly 16+ years. I'm not even sure what that means actually.
Youll enjoy this
http://skepticalscience.com/16_more_years_of_global_warming.html
I live on an island formed by glacial till, I'm kinda happy the earth warmed up. I hope it warms up a little more so I can surf all year comfortably. I really don't see a problem
If your island is in the ocean, know that many Pacific Islanders are currently looking to relocate to New Zealand and Australia before their islands go underwater.
Google it if you don't think so.
Not sure "Google it" passes your own standard of scientific integrity...
I was not refering to the science of the matter, but to the news of the matter. People relocating is news and the legitimate subject of a Google search.
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=pacific+islanders+leaving+islands+due+to+global+war...
See?
Why is everything always so difficult...
Cougar, What is your interest in this? You obviously spend your time reading the same swill as Flakmeister. No, I don't have a college degree like most of you folks here, but since I got a computer 4 years ago I try to seek out the truth and your side has been BUSTED
http://www.sepp.org/twtwfiles/2013/TWTW%20-%201-5-13.pdf
My interests are many. But let me try and explain something. It is not a simple thought, bear with me.
It is my seasoned observation that people do not understand science, the scientific method or how any of that works. I lay this failure at the feet of state-supported education and 50 years of corporate propaganda, but no matter, that's how it is so we can just deal with it. Because I am a classically trained scientist (yes university degrees, field work, the whole thing) I am alarmed at how poorly people understand the importance of these climate observations that have come from peer-reviewed scientific field work.
If the problem was that Al Gore once made a movie full of his opinions on something and people took him to task then I would not give a fig. He can defend his own work, that is not by domain.
But as it happens the entire field of climate science apart from Al Gore (who is not a scientist) is now under coordinated attack by very shrewd energy companies who are terrified beyond comprehension at the prospect of their entire industry output being viewed as a plague on humankind.
That suggests to me that the oil and coal industries might understand the problem quite clearly, and are actually worried that the framing needs to be managed to their advantage otherwise they might be regulated or even put out of business by policy. If they really are that worried then maybe there really is a problem in which case we should probably just drag them screaming into the light, have a good look, and pass judgement.
All that is policy, of course. Science has nothing to say about policy. But industry is going to destroy science to thwart policy and that is clearly a dangerous approach. The tobacco companies tried to destroy medical research linking tobacco to cancer, but failed. This was no doubt a very grave offense to the medical field who were later vindicated. Now the energy companies have taken the same approach (even using the same PR experts) with regardc to CO2 emmisions and now I find the shoe on the other foot and I'm not liking it at all.
Science is a tool. It is not a mystery how it works. It is not voodoo. Yes there are some complicated machines and measurements, the math can become hard, there are too many charts. Well what can you expect, everyone wants to see all of it to decide if the science is any good. Not everyone needs to dig into it in detail, that's fine, but if you don't want to they you really do have to trust that people who took the time to learn it all should probably be given the benefit of the doubt. And certainly if the entire field of work is headed a particular direction then that has great meaning.
So that is my main interest; to save science. I am not going to save the world. I don't plan to and really don't have the time. I'm not even sure it is worth saving. But if I can defend my craft and the others that work with me to push back the fronties of ignorance about our world, then I will do so.
The energy companies can go fuck themselves. They can die. Oh and they absolutely will die I assure you. I just think it would be criminal beyond measure to allow them to take the rest of us with them when they go.
well said. I thought, on other subjects, many here agree that global industries are slowly buying and controlling everything - courts, universities, media, armies, etc. It is strange that they have a hard time thinking what bias the energy industry (who has proven themselves powerful) might just be.
Industries are vehicles - not the drivers. Those morally-bankrupt brass that slink their way to controlling positions are rewarded for carrying forth the agenda (i.e., Jeff Immelt).
Also, there is no "energy industry" - it is a complex of several different industries. Production, refining, generation, transmission, distribution, retail infrastructure, asset developers, parts manufacturers, etc. Alignments and allegiances are fragmented across the complex.
So insurance and drug had nothing to do with Obamacare? Oil and Gas had nothing to do with Iraq and Afghan? They may not physically drive the car but all the Miss Daisies certainly pay the driver and tell him where to turn.
You don't have time to save the world?
At this point, I have seen hundreds of posts from you. You're a key-slappin' retard with all the time in the world. Funny, but I have seen nothing in your endless stream of cranial diarrhea to indicate you understand the first thing about science.
Please share where you went to school and what you studied, so we'll all know where not to send our kids.
Of course I understand science. I've taught it for many years. It's a very rewarding field of study, though I grew tired of the actual field work.
I have one word to explain why I grew tired of field work: Leeches.
These days I'm actually a software engineer. Ah and there is an interesting tale the tellng of which -- much like saving the world -- I have no actual time to devote.
I truly just hope to God you haven't reproduced. You and the other deniers here are amongst the most clueless I have seen. And that is saying something.
Wow.
Once again, not a single fucking fact.
Just another "You idiots don't understand the Science!!!!!!"
Can you hear the world laughing at you yet?
I'm so glad that my cluelessness rattles you. As I said, if you pay me enough, I'll swear your "science" is real.
And FYI: I have reproduced. That's what happens to people who can actually get laid (something else you'll never understand).
So in your opinion, where is the error in the conclusion that AGW is here, purely from a science perspective?
Show me what you got sticking *only* to published scientific facts, if you even dare to. Take your time and I will be back in a few hours...
I doubt that there will be anything of significance awaiting my return...
I will fight to defend rational conclusions based on empirical observations....
So like Coug, I defend science... It also no coincidence that he and I are quite possibly the only ones that have done academic research here at the Hedge...
The difference is that he has more patience with the fools here than I do...
More patience perhaps but I like your combative style. For my part I am reminded that every good ambush predator knows the importance of waiting.
It also no coincidence that he and I are quite possibly the only ones that have done academic research here at the Hedge...
Your belief in that possibility is pretty sound evidence of how many standard deviations you are from reality. And BTW, rational conclusions based on empirical observations only need to be articulated, not defended. "Academic" science to me is too often about defending conclusions of what empirical observations ought to say.
Notice that I only ever really feel compelled to defend the science.
The evidence as you suggest stands of it's own.
Funny thing about real science is that those that have done it, even in quite different fields, instinctly know when they are talking to another scientist from a different field... For instance, my use of academic in the above. The meaning is precise and clear to a person with research experience, to an outsider like you, it is just another word....Articulating science is about precise language, it is integral to training for the profession...
Still hung up on the standard deviation thingie I see... Get over it, like I said, those that know, know, and you don't....
You have no credibility, Flak. I can school you on statistics when there is a relevant context in which to do so. This whole thread is about junk science which you are trying to impose on the rest of "us" because you just can't get past the fact that no matter how smart you pretend to be, the data does not support what you think ought to be the truth.
The balance of your taunting remarks just shows that you fear anyone pulling back the veil on you. Your primary skill appears to be arguing in defense of fallacy. It's wasted on someone (you) who is obviously well above average intellect.
Edit: you focus on the mechanics of the so-called science of global warming/climate change, etc. That's because you're a lab rat. Let me give you the punch line: the whole movement is driven by an agenda whose intent is the consolidation of power and the rationing of freedom. Knock yourself out with your forensic machinations and attempts to belittle others' "inability" to keep up with the "science"; you're still in the weeds and not seeing the real picture.
Your argument fails on so many levels...
If AGW was wrong and merely a "front", those interests that percieve themselves to be under attack would be able to fund the simple research to show how wrong it is for a fraction of what they spend currently in to disinform people. The crap that we do see from the denial sites tied to big coal interests (e.g. the Kochs) is so blantantly wrong that either the people that are producing it are fools or liars...
Here are a great examples from just the past month:
https://tamino.wordpress.com/2012/12/20/fake-skeptic-draws-fake-picture-of-global-temperature/
https://tamino.wordpress.com/2012/12/18/horseshit-power/
As for statistics, you wouldn't know the variance of a Poisson distribution if it was jammed up your ass...
Edit: Another classic example of the bullshit produced by the paid deniers from yesterday...
https://tamino.wordpress.com/2013/01/09/deep-heat-shallow-thinking/
It's not the Koch's or any "interests" that are under attack...it's liberty that is under attack by those who cannot stand the thought of individual sovereignty. Lightweights like you chase the rabbit hole so deep you don't even realize you are an accomplice. It's astounding to watch folks like you cling to such apostasy. You just cannot perceive the larger picture of the agenda which drives this stuff and the underlying nature that gives it life. And so you argue all of the mechanics thinking that the truth lies somewhere in the numbers if only the rest of "us" could simply see the "undeniable" inference in the data.
I hope someday you will question yourself with as much acidity as you apply to anyone who would not see what you seem to divine out of your "science." Until then, I guess we'll just have to put up with your 9-year old disposition (which is, essentially, you are right or the debate must continue). Thanks for letting me mop the floor with you, tho. Made my nightly scotch a bit more enjoyable!
[Edit: Dropping supposed technical words like "Poisson" doesn't convey any comprehension. We can all look up things on Wikipedia. Doesn't translate into an ability to stand up to cross-examination, however. But at least you had the decency to capitalize the term.]
I am putting out the nuts and bolts of what is in the AGW public debate and you still cling to weasel word bullshit...Won't touch the data or the methodology? Eh?
You are intellectually and morally bankrupt. In a finite world such as Earth there is always the collective, it is called H. Sapiens. Denying physical reality because the implications of that reality is at odds with your desired world view is rudimentary logical falllacy... Look it up...
argumentum ad consequentiam
So why won't you simply say the science is correct but you are too much a selfish narcissist to give a fuck about anybody else...It at least be intellectually honest. And everyone could move along to our favorite whipping post, the Fed...
That was a better concession speech than Mitt Romney gave.
Be straight up, are you deliberately lying or have you been diagnosed with Dunning-Kruger Syndrome? Or just ignorant with a bit of both?
Don't bother replying, it was a rhetorical question...
You can't help yourself but to get in the last word. I bet it's beyond you to imagine that there are people in the world smarter, more articulate, and better able to frame an argument than you. I can almost hear the grating sound of your two remaining teeth grinding together.
It is pretty clear you don't have much of an education at all. Common sense...well not so common with you is it? BUSTED. You don't know the meaning of the word.
First, ZH posts stuff like this simply because it's an online NewsPaper. Not every article is for your pleasure or desire. Second, you trolls spouting vile that's adamantly certain there is no quantifyable global warming are like a crowd of people who sufocate the fallin man on the street corner. Back it up just a bit, will ya?
Obviously, as with any Issue, there's going to be hanger-ons and those who look for an angle to capitalize from. That IS Capitalism! So if you can make money from "greening" someons' home?.... Then do it! If you can make money from burning fuel in cars that do nothing but circle a race track at 4mpg then DO IT!
The data in the article above is in no way absolute, nor is it your father telling you to go to bed without dinner. It's just stuff to read. Regardless of your slant, simply use it as information and keep an open mind.
Yes. The earth might be warming do to more people walking around on it burning more stuff. No, it might not make a difference in your life time.
That's fine as far as it goes...
... if you never plan on having children.
Those of us with families start to worry about what we are leaving to our children when we are done with the earth. That my personal lifestyle choices might contribute to the creation of a world in which my own children are killed by starvation or resource wars -- troubles me. So I change my choices, for my kids, and I tell them what I am doing and why so they know I didn't try to kill them.
But maybe that's just me.
Piss on you and any lineage you spawn tool. Should have thought of that when you were throwing it into wifey, huh?
Validation!
Michael Crichton was an incredibly level headed guy on this topic. Caught a lot of crap over it too from the supposed "experts". Read the notes and appendix from "State of Fear".
Michael Crichton is a fiction wrtier. He should stick to that.
Anyone viewing is movies as some kind of window into the scientific process does a disservice to the human race.
Tell that to the zealot worshippers of An Inconvenient Truth?
I have done so, repeatedly. Pointing out the parts that probably do represent the views of legitimate science and those parts that represent reasonable guess work and those parts that represent Al Gore's personal opinion.
How do you feel now?
Notice, my having done so then and doing so now and being willing to do so again in the future changes nothing at all regarding my earlier statement about fiction writers. MC is still a spook.
Wait,
Other planets are experiencing global warming too?
Damn, those SUV's are deadly.
See how Flak and the others avoid this independant data like the plague. It is scientific, measured by the political scientists they rely on and they cannot refute it and it scares the crap out of them, a direct threat to their control fantasies and gaia worship.
Give it up you cannot make us into Al Gore.. Oh wait he just sold his watermelon network to the sheiks, well maybe you can make me a multimillionaire by lying to lefties, they believe any damn thing.
Eh? What warming are you talking about?
Are you refering to warming on Mars from albedo changes??? Coming out of the equivalent of a nuclear winter from a dust storm does have an effect...
Ahh, an interplanetary warming denier, we will have you up on charges in front of the pan-galactic IPCC.. How about Pluto, Mercury etal.. A defense of fracking perhaps..
Okay, Flak, unless you are willing to reveal your name, which I am going to guess is Michael Mann, why don't you just cut your losses right now, junior? You obviously have a personal economic interest in pushing this crap. You sound like a scratched record.
Its not my fault so people never catch a tune no matter how often it is played...
I couldn't hold Mann's jock at climate science and am not afraid to admit it, whereas I would more than hold my own with him on other matters, e.g. the physics of electro-weak symmetry breaking...
Why don't you go play in the WUWT echo chamber...
I couldn't hold Mann's jock at climate science and am not afraid to admit it
You post just revealed an important truth about your religion. The fact that you have a hierarchy within your order is very telling. TRUTH is absolute and rejects such rankings. What you effectively are saying is that Mr. Mann is a better and more effective teller of the Great Tale than you are.
No, what I am saying is that someone who has dedicated most of the past 15-20 years at the forefront of a discipline will know a fuck of a lot more than just about anyone not studying that discipline...
You do have an active imagination...
I once explained to a friend of mine that if you are standing at the North Pole, no matter which way you go, the next step you take will be southward. He spent hours arguing that it wasn't so. What you are your buddy Mann are doing is a lot like what my friend was doing... So being at the "forefront" of a myth and calling that myth a "discipline" is self-aggrandizement. Which is your core strength. Again, thanks for the extended opportunity to steamroll your supposed acumen.
So your friend was ignorant... What is the relevance to this discussion?
BTW, your, and by this I mean the denier, community, has to do a lot more than just show Mann is wrong (whatever that actually means as his results have independently verified), you have to explain the observed climate data, e.g. the known ice ages. If you do that, you then have to reconcile that mechanism and its effect on the paleo climate with what is currently going on.. And that is the 800 lb gorilla that guys like Watts don't ever want to go near...
Give it up, just say you don't understand the science and that you really don't care what happens... I can then at least respect your intellectual honesty...
Here is another beautiful of cross checking the data, crucial to the advancement of science, that just came out.
http://skepticalscience.com/nature-confirms-global-warming.html
Now I'm beginning to rethink my view that you are even smart.
Find that "Statistics for Dummies" yet?
Wait till Mark Steyn gets through discovery with "nobel prize winning Michael Mann (liar)" We will be beating flak upside the head with the lying hockey stick until he changes his name.. Mann screwed with the wrong people this time..
Statists you cannot make us do what you need us to do, like Dr. Ayers says you must kill us, all 25-30 million..
Doesn't matter what is happening on other planets. We live here, we pollute here, we die here. I don't see what part of that confuses people.
"Doesn't matter what is happening on other planets. "
You just gave yourself away.
What? How so? Oh you mean that I'm not from Mars? Yes that is perfectly true.
I wish I understood where all this was headed.
What is happening on other planets does matter if it relates to what is happening on this planet.
Planetary physics is a rarified field with few researchers, very little ongoing data gathering and virtually no unified theory. And in case you think I've overstated the problem notice that even though Earth is the home to all human life, and we live in every corner of the planet, study it fiercely, and have thousands of years of observations, and thousands of dedicated researchers representing every race and culture the planet has produced, for all that we are only recently getting a handle on the atmospheric dynamics of just the Earth.
Leaping then from the Earth-system to any other extra-terrestrial system just boggles the mind completely.
I don't know how else to say it.
Boggles the mind.
As such it would be extremely foolish to then look at any other world, from a distance to try and infer anything at all about its status or dynamics, and then turn that around and say that the only planet we have any handle on is operating that very same way, and in the process tossing out 8,000 years of close Earth observations.
It boggles the mind. Completely. I hardly know where else to take the notion.
Doesn't matter. I get it.
Oh yes that's it. Doesn't matter. How sensible.
I probably would have said just that except 1) nobody here would accept it at face value, and 2) my mind was too boogled to effectively grapple it down to doesn't matter.
So everyone you see it's as simple at that.
You said it!
Record heat cause by global warming… record cold caused by global warming. Makes sense to me.
http://news.yahoo.com/chinas-extreme-cold-snaps-records-141522805.html
Does anyone remember the global COOLING Scare of 1974?
Yes, TIME magazine is a bastion of scientific knowledge...
Check out what the real scientists were saying
http://skepticalscience.com/ice-age-predictions-in-1970s.htm
"Yes, TIME magazine is a bastion of scientific knowledge"...
Apparently, so are you.
Does it matter or does it just give you something irrelevant to post? Pinhead.
I'll try and clear that up for you.
Global atmospheric conditions create prevailing winds. Prevailing winds determine local weather. Change the dynamics of the atmosphere and you have a direct connection to changing weather.
If you inject vast amounts of moisture and heat into the atmosphere you dramatically alter atmospheric patterns.
So yes you get it from both directions. And, you get it thrown at you very hard.
The Earth is set to kill us in very large numbers.
Wildfires are not weather .... earthquakes and tsunamis and wars aren't weather .... neither ! Why the hell should we believe their weather data .... when they lie about everything else .... BLSBS ?
The price of gasoline is not weather! So!!1!
Quick everyone up-arrow me! I iz random!
Guessing you're a proponent of "medicinal" marijuana who suffers from a chronic condition...
No just trying to go with the flow. Today is random day, seems like.
And in China it is going for the coldest year on record. We already know who has the record for being the stupidist things on earth. That title is held by the AGW people.
Yeah what the hell is the Arctic Circle doing down in China and Russia anyway? Man you'd think the world can just do anything it likes now.
And besides, where does the energy come from to move the entire fucking Arctic weather system that far south? That's just crazy.
You'd almost think the whole planetary atmospheric engine was hyped up with -- I don't know -- energy or something.
How about Antarctica? I think you and Flakmeister are husband and wife. I'm just not sure which of you plays the man's part.
What about Antarctica.
Oh wait did you mean this?
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=antarctic+warming
Yeah that's shocking. We're majorly fucked like a duck looks like.
Global warming - more business for the socialists and the rule making policy writers.
More business for house movers in coastal areas.
Bullshit. Globally, 2012 was 9th warmest year since 1979.
http://www.drroyspencer.com/2013/01/uah-v5-5-global-temperature-update-f...
Whooppee, Roy Spencer!! Pure leftist gold. I thought the comment thread was particularly telling.
When countries have been manipulating climate in secret like everything else , for decades .
It does not matter to me which cycle we are in .The people are not to blame for your fucked up feeble game of becoming GOD. Man is not and will never be GOD.Take your man bear pig shit and shove it.
As far as I am concerned your climate manipulation is cutting down on my solar power preventing me from reducing my so called carbon footprint.So fuck your climate religion NWO.
Yep... gets hot, gets cold and black is still black and white is still white for those of us that live beyond the smoke and mirrors of political bile.
The eye is on you NWO just like us.
"your climate manipulation"
You are pretty much insane. You know that, right?
Well it's a good thing that we can determine the entire earth's climate change by what happensed on part of one continent. Hmm, think I'll use the weather report for NYC to make my plans for the coming weekend in Germany.
Actually they use data taken from all over the world to determine global warming trends.
That report is out next week.
[edit: I get a down-arrow for stating a simple and obvious fact. ZH is probably the greastest bastion of knee-jerk lunacy.]
There is one thing you can count on .... another Ice Age cometh !
There is a good chance now that the Earth will not experience an ice age again, certainly not for a couple million years, there is simply too much CO2 in the atmosphere to allow for it.
Not that anyone actually cares about ice ages.
Now I get it, cougar w and flakmeister are one and the same. A one agenda Jekyll and Hyde
No no that's not it. And like much else in the world the truth is far more interesting.
who gives a shit.
The Record being only 117 years old, means that is is about as stasticly important as most of the other out of context stuff on this site.
Records are records. Most people know what that feels like.
Maybe in the U.S. Here in Western Europe, we didn't have any summer. The "summer" of 2012 was the wettest in the last one hundred years. In terms of temperature, 2012 was not outstanding in Western Europe.
Exact same thing happened in much of Australia the last two summers, except the far south west corner, we had unusual extended cloudiness and very high rainfalls in the months when it's usually dry, and a summer with no heat in it.
The place is almost completely on fire right now.
Ok, if you're just going to act like a hyperbolic dumb-ass, I'll treat you like one.
I live here, it ain't burning. I just flew over it, it ain't burning.
We get bush fires every year. duh!
Now go look at some satellite images to reassure yourself that australia is still there, and pull your head out of your arse.
yes, the 120 degree temps right now are quite cold
hey fool, where I grew up it was pushing 120 degrees most sunmmmer days many decades ago
AGW! ... who knew!!!
fool
Regardless of WHY it is occurring, pretty clearly it is occurring and without a major shift coming (it won't without coordinated global political effort - how's that for a laugh), all we can do is REACT to this phenomenon. First place I would like to start is to eliminate Federal and state subsidies for insurance for flood zone areas...WHY do we flatlanders need to subsidize homeowners in areas that are not just likely to flood but almost assuredly will flood...stupidity.
Insurance companies are red-lining these areas as we speak.
Since the solution is more taxes, more control of the individual and more statism, you know "climate change" is complete BS.
Never miss an opportunity to financialize EVERYTHING. ;-)