2009: Second warmest year on record; end of warmest decade
in [Physics]
|
Prev: NASA to Earth: Global Warming Is for Real, Folks!
Next: Second warmest year on record; end of warmest decade
From: Cat_in_awe on 26 Feb 2010 13:39 Earl Evleth wrote: > On 26/02/10 12:17, in article > i5bfo5du1cmvhpnfcn6fj17bdsfsrclesm(a)nntp.frankenexpress.de, "Peter > Muehlbauer" <spamtrap.AT(a)AT.frankenexpress.de> wrote: > >>> 2009: Second warmest year on record >> >> What record? > > The record since accurate measurements have been made. Accurate? By what standard? Like all the accuracy induced by throwing away 75% of your reporting stations? Your data sucks.
From: Cat_in_awe on 26 Feb 2010 13:56 Sam Wormley wrote: > > Whether one considers global climate change as a > problem is perspective dependent. Actually, that's not the gist of it. Far more important is whether you think modifying man's use of fossil fuels can have any impact on the climate. If the Earth+Sun system is 'running things' and anthropogenic CO2 has a trivial impact on the climate as a whole, it is a fool's errand (and equivalent to smashing ourselves in the head with hammer) to artifically force decreased use of fossil fuels by goverment mandate. Even IF man-produced CO2 has some major impact on the climate, I have yet to see ANY study showing that realistically possible decreases in fossil fuel use can have any effect. The AGW whackos always stop at "we have to stop burning oil", instead of demonstrating such a decrease can really change the weather, let alone cause any cooling. > > CLEANTECHNICA: NASA to Earth: Global Warming Is for Real, Folks! > NASA is putting its two cents into the global warming conversation > with a new Web site that details the climate change phenomenon, > including videos, articles and a huge archive of images > http://cl.exct.net/?qs=bb493ab0c40160cae3dcdd3f65e9769a9e5d4b1c53f56c4f6b30056f712da911 How is NASA weighing in on AGW something new? They run GISS.
From: oriel36 on 26 Feb 2010 14:05 On Feb 26, 7:56 pm, "Cat_in_awe" <rl3166...(a)excite.com> wrote: > Sam Wormley wrote: > > > Whether one considers global climate change as a > > problem is perspective dependent. > > Actually, that's not the gist of it. Far more important is whether you > think modifying man's use of fossil fuels can have any impact on the > climate. That too is at best limited and at worst incorrect,the gist is that humans can control global temperatures within a certain range through a minor atmospheric gas level and there is no precedence in the history of the human race for such a dire intellectual standard. It is not about climate change,global warming/cooling, but rather the ability of people to think properly and turn away from the prediction/ modelling agenda and return to interpretation .
From: OG on 26 Feb 2010 18:27 "Peter Muehlbauer" <spamtrap.AT(a)AT.frankenexpress.de> wrote in message news:66efo5hcv2kdj23uhnnn9f1te1b00ounsn(a)nntp.frankenexpress.de... > Tom P <werotizy(a)freent.dd> wrote: > >> Peter Muehlbauer wrote: >> > Sam Wormley <swormley1(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> >> 2009: Second warmest year on record >> > >> > What record? >> > >> > What makes a year important within a cherrypicked slope and within a >> > flyspeck of time compared to hundreds of bigger ups and downs during >> > the last >> > 12000 years of interglacial? >> > >> > <AGW mode> Shrill... SHRILL ... S H R I L L !!!!!!111oneeleven </> >> >> Translation - the mill farmer can't think of anything to say. > > Translation: > If you stand convicted and can't refute a word, start attacking the > author. Do you have evidence for a bigger up? You claim 'bigger ups and downs', do you have evidence?
From: Marvin the Martian on 26 Feb 2010 22:19
On Fri, 26 Feb 2010 12:48:33 +0100, Tom P wrote: > Peter Muehlbauer wrote: >> Sam Wormley <swormley1(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> 2009: Second warmest year on record >> >> What record? >> >> What makes a year important within a cherrypicked slope and within a >> flyspeck of time compared to hundreds of bigger ups and downs during >> the last 12000 years of interglacial? >> >> <AGW mode> Shrill... SHRILL ... S H R I L L !!!!!!111oneeleven </> > > Translation - the mill farmer can't think of anything to say. The problem you're facing is that AGW has been exposed as a big fraud, the people claiming that this January is "warmest on record" have no credibility and are known liars, most of the Eastern US is freezing their asses off, and this is cherry picked data at best. And even IF there is global warming, it is a post hoc fallacy to claim that warming exist, ergo it is caused by human produced CO2 and thus warming is bad. It's just a stupid argument you have from the get go. And we're tired of stupid arguments and the idiots who make them. Sorry. |