Climate change is on ice

[Fractals 'R Us]

Wow, "science" is presenting a never-ending series of entertaining thingies for us: theories, postulates, computer models, etc., while they stumble around in the dark.

Generations actually have to die off before bad theories/computer models get tossed out. Forget objectivity, open discussions, etc.. they are just asshats that can't really think well enough to change and go with the flow of data/info. They cannot question their assumptions, in fact many cannot tell the difference between an assertion and a proven fact and when assertions are used as assumptions, well... it never can end well now can it?

 

[fhl]

While the earth's temperature <b>drops</b>, and the fraudsters are pulling scientific theories out of their behinds to attempt to account for it, as noted in posts above mine, our illustrious Sec of State John Fn Kerry says this:
“Once again, the science grows clearer, the case grows more compelling, and the costs of inaction grow beyond anything that anyone with conscience or common sense should be willing to even contemplate.”

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2013/09/27/u...5-years-without-global-warming/#ixzz2gBRgng2x

And with very, very good reason, George.

 

[futurecurrents]

Quote from John_Wensink:

LOL idiot

At the heart of the problem lie the computer models which, for 25 years, have formed the basis for the IPCC’s scaremongering: they predicted runaway global warming, when the real rise in temperatures has been much more modest.

This is why the latest Assessment Report is proving such a headache to the IPCC. It’s the first in its history to admit what its critics have said for years: global warming did “pause” unexpectedly in 1998 and shows no sign of resuming. And, other than an ad hoc new theory about the missing heat having been absorbed by the deep ocean

It's true. You denialist Republicans are just too dumb to understand.

Apparently you think measuring the temperature of the earth is done by measuring the temperature of the air only, which only contains 6% of the earth's heat.

The climate models have not failed. No-one except dumb-ass pubs think charts move in straight lines. I guess they never heard of things like deviation around a mean. Yes, the models failed to adequately account for the oceans. So what. They are not expected to have that resolution yet. The models are always improving. Precisely predicting a chaotic system like the earth's atmosphere is a difficult job indeed. The essential point is that the earth - and remember, that INCLUDES THE OCEANS - has NOT stopped or even slowed warming to any significant degree.

But maybe you can point to where on this chart between 98 and 2012 the earth stopped warming .

 

[Lucrum]

Quote from Fractals 'R Us:

Wow, "science" is presenting a never-ending series of entertaining thingies for us: theories, postulates, computer models, etc., while they stumble around in the dark.

Generations actually have to die off before bad theories/computer models get tossed out. Forget objectivity, open discussions, etc.. they are just asshats that can't really think well enough to change and go with the flow of data/info. They cannot question their assumptions, in fact many cannot tell the difference between an assertion and a proven fact and when assertions are used as assumptions, well... it never can end well now can it?

I enjoy and have an interest in science. Not as much as history but some.

"Science" today is not what it used to be. And it's not for the better.

 

[gwb-trading]

The latest excuse from the global warming alarmists to explain away the failure of their models - "The oceans are sucking up all the heat. See my dramatic chart of how the ocean temperatures have risen".

 

[Lucrum]

Quote from Banjo:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencet...xplain-Earths-barely-got-hotter-15-years.html

On the news last night Diane Sawyer and the reporter covering this mentioned only the alarmist parts of the report. Ignoring the parts that don't fit the AGW narrative.

Joseph Goebbels would have been proud of these <s>journalists</s> propagandists.

 

[futurecurrents]

Quote from gwb-trading:

The latest excuse from the global warming alarmists to explain away the failure of their models - "The oceans are sucking up all the heat. See my dramatic chart of how the ocean temperatures have risen".

And of course that explanation makes no sense to you because you are a dumb Republican. Thanks for the confirmation. Again.

 

[gwb-trading]

Quote from futurecurrents:

And of course that explanation makes no sense to you because you are a dumb Republican. Thanks for the confirmation. Again.

You are grasping for straws on why all the models have failed, on why there has been no warming for 16 years and why now over 50% of scientists believe AGW does not exist. The best you can do apparently is call people names and pull some theory about the oceans being at fault out of your rectum.

Here is your award.

 

[futurecurrents]

Quote from gwb-trading:

You are grasping for straws on why all the models have failed, on why there has been no warming for 16 years and why now over 50% of scientists believe AGW does not exist. The best you can do apparently is call people names and pull some theory about the oceans being at fault out of your rectum.

Here is your award.

What? You think 50% believe AGW does not exist? Wow. You are beyond dumb. You're in the crazy category with jerm. I thought there was hope for you when you posted about Wattsupwitdat is a paid for whore denialist website funded by the Koch bros. But now it seems that ischemic stroke you had has worn off....LOL.

And you are repeating lies. The earth certainly has kept warming over the last (cherry-picked) 16 years. If you keep repeating lies I will have to call you a liar. Especially since I have given you proof otherwise.

So which is it? Are you a liar? Or are you someone who can admit they were wrong.

 

[jem]

this is peer reviewed. you are spouting unsupported garbage fc.

Quote from jem:

man made global warming is a minority position.

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/09/...ven-by-a-new-paper-showing-major-math-errors/


"The consensus Cook considered was the standard definition: that Man had caused most post-1950 warming. Even on this weaker definition the true consensus among published scientific papers is now demonstrated to be not 97.1%, as Cook had claimed, but only 0.3%.

Only 41 out of the 11,944 published climate papers Cook examined explicitly stated that Man caused most of the warming since 1950. Cook himself had flagged just 64 papers as explicitly supporting that consensus, but 23 of the 64 had not in fact supported it.

This shock result comes scant weeks before the United Nations’ climate panel, the IPCC, issues its fifth five-yearly climate assessment, claiming “95% confidence” in the imagined – and, as the new paper shows, imaginary – consensus."