The quote is from a well written factual article at the link. So of course you won't read it because you are a deluded sheep.
Fraudcurrents - NOAA just proved you were a fool
- Thread starter jem
- Start date
The quote is from a well written factual article at the link. So of course you won't read it because you are a deluded sheep.
Bullshit. Here's an excerpt from the IPCC's own report showing how so-called climatologists' models failed way to the high side during the pause you claim didn't happen that is shown here (observed temps are the thick black lines).
LOL, you are a clown.
UN computer predictions subject of ridicule: not got it right for 18 years
Across the globe, there are about 1m sq km more sea ice than 35 years ago
Authorities are now guessing global temperatures based on nearby weather stations
n recent days a new scandal over the integrity of temperature data has emerged, this time in America, where it has been revealed as much as 40 per cent of temperature data there are not real thermometer readings.
Many temperature stations have closed, but rather than stop recording data from these posts, the authorities have taken the remarkable step of âestimatingâ temperatures based on the records of surrounding stations.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-ridicule-stunning-failure.html#ixzz36qj0vJUi
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-ridicule-stunning-failure.html#ixzz36qicFH5V
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
UN computer predictions subject of ridicule: not got it right for 18 years
Across the globe, there are about 1m sq km more sea ice than 35 years ago
Authorities are now guessing global temperatures based on nearby weather stations
n recent days a new scandal over the integrity of temperature data has emerged, this time in America, where it has been revealed as much as 40 per cent of temperature data there are not real thermometer readings.
Many temperature stations have closed, but rather than stop recording data from these posts, the authorities have taken the remarkable step of âestimatingâ temperatures based on the records of surrounding stations.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-ridicule-stunning-failure.html#ixzz36qj0vJUi
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-ridicule-stunning-failure.html#ixzz36qicFH5V
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
Got anything from an authoritative source? No? Didn't think so. Until you do just shut the fuck up. Everything you posted is wrong.
the editorial stance of which broadly reflects that of the Daily Mail, being to the right wing of mainstream British politics and typically supporting the UK Conservative Party.[12] MailOnline articles tend to be dominated by pictures rather than long-form journalism.[2] A major component of the website is its entertainment news, often featuring celebrities such as Kim Kardashian[13] or members of the British Royal Family such as the Duchess of Cambridge.[14] It is estimated that 25% of the traffic received by the website is purely to access the entertainment and gossip stories.[15]
Claimed inaccuracies and controversies[edit]
September 2009: Geek.com reported that a story posted in MailOnline about a solar panel made from human hair[20] was a hoax.[21] Engineer Edward Craig Hyatt stated that it was not possible to use human hair in any configuration to generate electricity when exposed to light.[22]
June 2010: The Guardian reported that MailOnline had published an inaccurate story about an iPhone 4 recall, based on a Twitter message from a parody account by a Steve Jobs impersonator.[23] MailOnline realised its error and removed the article.[24]
In October 2011, MailOnline and several other news sources published standby articles on Amanda Knox's trial prematurely. The articles reported an upholding of the guilty verdict before the judge had finished announcing the reversal of the guilty verdict.[25][26][27][28] Mail Online stated the article was removed within 90 seconds and apologized. The article became the subject of a Press Complaints Commission complaint that noted the article's reporting of events and reactions that had not taken place and said that was "not acceptable" but commented positively on the handling of the error.[29][30][31][32]
January 2012: ABC News Radio reported the falsity of a story "repeated by numerous media outlets" concerning a supposed naming by Advertising Age of a campaign by singer Rihanna for fashion house Armani as the "sexiest ad of the year." The story, Ad Age said, "seemed to have originated with the British tabloid the Daily Mail.[33] Huffington Post removed the story and apologized.[34]
January 2012: Robert Hart-Fletcher, of the charity "Kids and Media", told BeefJack, a gaming magazine, that quotes attributed to him were "completely fabricated" across a range of British media, most prominently the Daily Mail and the BBC.[35]
April 2012: MailOnline published an article about a dentist who extracted her ex-boyfriend's teeth; the piece was later exposed as a hoax by MSNBC.com. The article appeared under the byline of reporter Simon Tomlinson, who said he does not know where the story came from.[36][37][38]
April 2012: The Christian Science Monitor reported that MailOnline had misused an opinion piece published in Egypt's Al-Ahram newspaper and translated into English by Al Arabiya. The original article claimed "Egypt's parliament was considering a piece of legislation sponsored by Islamists to allow men to have sex with their wives after their death." The Daily Mail, wrote Monitor staff writer Dan Murphy, "distorted the original claim from a proposal to a done deal: 'Egyptian husbands will soon be legally allowed to have sex with their dead wives', the tabloid claimed, apparently having misunderstood the original Al Arabiya translation. "[39]
October 2012: Actor Nicolas Cage received an apology and damages for a false story in Mail Online about allegations of tax evasion.[40]
January 2014: The MailOnline Australia courted controversy after The Australian reported that Board member Mark Britt appointed his secret mistress Mikaela Lancaster to the post of General Manager.[41]
And this is the kind of shit site denier morons are reduced to referring to. Pathetic sheep they are.
Claimed inaccuracies and controversies[edit]
September 2009: Geek.com reported that a story posted in MailOnline about a solar panel made from human hair[20] was a hoax.[21] Engineer Edward Craig Hyatt stated that it was not possible to use human hair in any configuration to generate electricity when exposed to light.[22]
June 2010: The Guardian reported that MailOnline had published an inaccurate story about an iPhone 4 recall, based on a Twitter message from a parody account by a Steve Jobs impersonator.[23] MailOnline realised its error and removed the article.[24]
In October 2011, MailOnline and several other news sources published standby articles on Amanda Knox's trial prematurely. The articles reported an upholding of the guilty verdict before the judge had finished announcing the reversal of the guilty verdict.[25][26][27][28] Mail Online stated the article was removed within 90 seconds and apologized. The article became the subject of a Press Complaints Commission complaint that noted the article's reporting of events and reactions that had not taken place and said that was "not acceptable" but commented positively on the handling of the error.[29][30][31][32]
January 2012: ABC News Radio reported the falsity of a story "repeated by numerous media outlets" concerning a supposed naming by Advertising Age of a campaign by singer Rihanna for fashion house Armani as the "sexiest ad of the year." The story, Ad Age said, "seemed to have originated with the British tabloid the Daily Mail.[33] Huffington Post removed the story and apologized.[34]
January 2012: Robert Hart-Fletcher, of the charity "Kids and Media", told BeefJack, a gaming magazine, that quotes attributed to him were "completely fabricated" across a range of British media, most prominently the Daily Mail and the BBC.[35]
April 2012: MailOnline published an article about a dentist who extracted her ex-boyfriend's teeth; the piece was later exposed as a hoax by MSNBC.com. The article appeared under the byline of reporter Simon Tomlinson, who said he does not know where the story came from.[36][37][38]
April 2012: The Christian Science Monitor reported that MailOnline had misused an opinion piece published in Egypt's Al-Ahram newspaper and translated into English by Al Arabiya. The original article claimed "Egypt's parliament was considering a piece of legislation sponsored by Islamists to allow men to have sex with their wives after their death." The Daily Mail, wrote Monitor staff writer Dan Murphy, "distorted the original claim from a proposal to a done deal: 'Egyptian husbands will soon be legally allowed to have sex with their dead wives', the tabloid claimed, apparently having misunderstood the original Al Arabiya translation. "[39]
October 2012: Actor Nicolas Cage received an apology and damages for a false story in Mail Online about allegations of tax evasion.[40]
January 2014: The MailOnline Australia courted controversy after The Australian reported that Board member Mark Britt appointed his secret mistress Mikaela Lancaster to the post of General Manager.[41]
And this is the kind of shit site denier morons are reduced to referring to. Pathetic sheep they are.
Like NASA who's been cooking the books?
NASA Rewriting US History
Until about ten years ago, NASA showed the US on an 80 year long cooling trend, with the three hottest years being in the 1920s and 1930s. They have deleted the raw data from their website and blocked archiving, but John Daly captured it. It was originally located at this link :
http://www.giss.nasa.gov/data/update/gistemp/graphs/FigD.txt
and can now be seen here :
http://web.archive.org/web/20120124014257/http://www.john-daly.com/usatemps.006
NASA has since rewritten US history and shows the same period warming â with 1998 as the hottest year.
data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs_v3/Fig.D.txt
James Hansen wrote this in 1999, before he decided to alter US history :
Empirical evidence does not lend much support to the notion that climate is headed precipitately toward more extreme heat and drought. The drought of 1999 covered a smaller area than the 1988 drought, when the Mississippi almost dried up. And 1988 was a temporary inconvenience as compared with repeated droughts during the 1930s âDust Bowlâ that caused an exodus from the prairies, as chronicled in Steinbeckâs Grapes of Wrath.
in the U.S. there has been little temperature change in the past 50 years, the time of rapidly increasing greenhouse gases â in fact, there was a slight cooling throughout much of the country
This sort of honest assessment was no use for obtaining funding or achieving radical left wing political goals, so Hansen created a hockey stick of adjustments to cool the past and warm the present.
The current version of the US temperature record from NOAA and NASA is a complete fraud, and fundamentally misrepresents changes to the US climate.
http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2012/11/18/nasa-rewriting-us-history/
NASA Hiding The Decline In US Temperatures Through Data Tampering
Posted on June 15, 2014
In 1999, NASA reported the US was in a 70 year cooling trend.
That story wasnât scary and wasnât going to raise any money for NASA, so they massively altered the data to create a warming trend. The 2014 version adds 1.3C/century warming from 1976 to 1998, which didnât exist 15 years ago.
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs_v3/Fig.D.txt
The thermometer data which NASA uses to generate the temperatures, shows the US cooling over the past 90 years
http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/...ne-in-us-temperatures-through-data-tampering/
Posted on June 15, 2014
In 1999, NASA reported the US was in a 70 year cooling trend.
Whither U.S. Climate?
By James Hansen, Reto Ruedy, Jay Glascoe and Makiko Sato â August 1999
Empirical evidence does not lend much support to the notion that climate is headed precipitately toward more extreme heat and drought.
in the U.S. there has been little temperature change in the past 50 years, the time of rapidly increasing greenhouse gases â in fact, there was a slight cooling throughout much of the country (Figure 2)
http://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/briefs/hansen_07/By James Hansen, Reto Ruedy, Jay Glascoe and Makiko Sato â August 1999
Empirical evidence does not lend much support to the notion that climate is headed precipitately toward more extreme heat and drought.
in the U.S. there has been little temperature change in the past 50 years, the time of rapidly increasing greenhouse gases â in fact, there was a slight cooling throughout much of the country (Figure 2)
That story wasnât scary and wasnât going to raise any money for NASA, so they massively altered the data to create a warming trend. The 2014 version adds 1.3C/century warming from 1976 to 1998, which didnât exist 15 years ago.
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs_v3/Fig.D.txt
The thermometer data which NASA uses to generate the temperatures, shows the US cooling over the past 90 years
http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/...ne-in-us-temperatures-through-data-tampering/
Antarctic sea ice IS increasing!!!!! Global warming is now global cooling!!!!!
All the denier morons start dancing!!!!
But .....
One must also be careful how you interpret trends in Antarctic sea ice. Currently this ice is increasing overall and has been for years but is this the smoking gun against climate change? Not quite. Antarctic sea ice is gaining because of many different reasons but the most accepted recent explanations are listed below:
i) Ozone levels over Antarctica have dropped causing stratospheric cooling and increasing winds which lead to more areas of open water that can be frozen (Gillet 2003, Thompson 2002, Turner 2009).
and
ii) The Southern Ocean is freshening because of increased rain and snowfall as well as an increase in meltwater coming from the edges of Antarctica's land ice (Zhang 2007, Bintanga et al. 2013). Together, these change the composition of the different layers in the ocean there causing less mixing between warm and cold layers and thus less melted sea and coastal land ice.
All the denier morons start dancing!!!!
But .....
One must also be careful how you interpret trends in Antarctic sea ice. Currently this ice is increasing overall and has been for years but is this the smoking gun against climate change? Not quite. Antarctic sea ice is gaining because of many different reasons but the most accepted recent explanations are listed below:
i) Ozone levels over Antarctica have dropped causing stratospheric cooling and increasing winds which lead to more areas of open water that can be frozen (Gillet 2003, Thompson 2002, Turner 2009).
and
ii) The Southern Ocean is freshening because of increased rain and snowfall as well as an increase in meltwater coming from the edges of Antarctica's land ice (Zhang 2007, Bintanga et al. 2013). Together, these change the composition of the different layers in the ocean there causing less mixing between warm and cold layers and thus less melted sea and coastal land ice.