Your logic is impeccable. Oh sorry, I mean the opposite of impeccable. I mean your logic is retarded. LOL
Heat goes on: Earth headed for warmest year on record
- Thread starter futurecurrents
- Start date
Your logic is impeccable. Oh sorry, I mean the opposite of impeccable. I mean your logic is retarded. LOL
and nobody knows retarded better than futurecurrents!
Ha ha ha....The Express !! What's next, the comic from a bazooka bubble gum? Jem, did you take your medication today?
Paleoclimatic data are critical for enabling us to extend our knowledge of climatic variability beyond what is measured by modern instruments. Many natural phenomena are climate dependent (such as the growth rate of a tree for example), and as such, provide natural 'archives' of climate information. Some useful paleoclimate data can be found in sources as diverse as tree rings, ice cores, corals, lake sediments (including fossil insects and pollen data), speleothems (stalactites etc), and ocean sediments. Some of these, including ice cores and tree rings provide us also with a chronology due to the nature of how they are formed, and so high resolution climate reconstruction is possible in these cases. However, there is not a comprehensive 'network' of paleoclimate data as there is with instrumental coverage, so global climate reconstructions are often difficult to obtain. Nevertheless, combining different types of paleoclimate records enables us to gain a near-global picture of climate changes in the distant past.
For Northern Hemisphere temperature, recent decades appear to be the warmest since at least about 1000AD, and the warming since the late 19th century is unprecedented over the last 1000 years. Older data are insufficient to provide reliable hemispheric temperature estimates. Ice core data suggest that the 20th century has been warm in many parts of the globe, but also that the significance of the warming varies geographically, when viewed in the context of climate variations of the last millennium.
Large and rapid climatic changes affecting the atmospheric and oceanic circulation and temperature, and the hydrological cycle, occurred during the last ice age and during the transition towards the present Holocene period (which began about 10,000 years ago). Based on the incomplete evidence available, the projected change of 3 to 7°F (1.5 - 4°C) over the next century would be unprecedented in comparison with the best available records from the last several thousand years.
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/monitoring-references/faq/global-warming.php
Sometimes you just got to laugh at this crap... Let's go to the top of the page.
"This page is based on a brief synopsis of the 2007 Fourth Assessment Report (AR4) by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), as well as NCDC's own data resources. It was prepared by David Easterling and Tom Karl, National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, N.C. 28801."
David Easterling and Tom Karl are two of the biggest climate alarmists in North Carolina. They are the two clowns who told the state that our sea coast water level was going to rise over one meter over a 10 year period. (It is now 2014 and the rise predicted back in the 1990s still has not occurred).
Nothing says batshiat alarmist crazy as presenting material from David Easterling and Tom Karl.
It just sad that their overt insanity is funded with our tax dollars.
Yes we know, to you scientists that tell the truth are batshit crazy alarmists. And no, they did not predict a three foot rise in ten years. In addition to being retarded you are a liar.
Did you ever considered a career in writing children's fiction? Something in the similar theme of the Chicken Little story. Maybe a series featuring a retarded global warming alarmist parrot.
So you admit to lying about their sea level rise prediction. That's what I thought. A moron AND a liar.
So are you claiming that the hoaxsters did not say that warmer temps lead to stronger and more frequent hurricanes? I will even help you out on this one. Yes, they did make this claim over and over.
Now if temp is positively correlated with the level of hurricane activity, then the warmest year should have a very active hurricane season. It didn't.
Now you are claiming this was the warmest year and we know for a fact hurricane activity was low so you are either lying about this being the warmest year or 97% of the scientists in the world are wrong because global warming has a consensus.
Why don't you use google and look up the facts. In the 1990s, these two clowns were pitching that the water level was going to rise in our coast by one meter in a mere decade due to "out-of-control global warming caused by man".
You appear to be confusing the nonsense put out by these two characters in the 1990s with what occurred in 2009.
In year 2009 was the most recent "study" stating that the water level would rise by a meter by Year 2100 and all coastal development should stop. A group of 20 coastal North Carolina counties opposed this "study" and brought forward facts that made the state shoot it down, and our legislature created a strict ruling that alleged global warming sea level rise could not be used to define building codes or practices on the North Carolina coast. This, of course, got the global alarming alarmists in a tizzy - who all tried to claim that the North Carolina legislature had voted that "global warming does not exist" (which is not the truth about what the bill stated obviously).
Still no logic. Too stupid to know the phrase "on average" means. What a dope. Typical righty.
Here's a hint dopey. One year does not an average make. Did I confuse you?
