The Global Warming Hoax is falling apart

[bigdavediode]

Quote from MRBRETTONWOODS:

Here is the full set of UAH data
http://woodfortrees.org/plot/uah/from:1978/to:1994/trend/plot/uah/from:1978/to:1994
http://woodfortrees.org/plot/uah/from:1995/to:2000/trend/plot/uah/from:1995/to:2000
http://woodfortrees.org/plot/uah/from:2001/to:2009/trend/plot/uah/from:2001/to:2009

The periods of 1978 – 1994 and 2001- to date both show cooling trends.

LOL. Do an experiment -- enter the data as HADCRUT3.

Then go to the HADCRUT3 website and compare their graph of their data, using their information shown here:

<img src="http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/data/temperature/_nhshgl.gif"> </img>

http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/data/temperature/

Any explanation of why "landfortrees" graph doesn't match the primary source for their own data?

Here you go, one of your often quoted sites, shows that CO2 lags temps.

http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2004/12/co2-in-ice-cores/

Thank you. From the article: "Does this prove that CO2 doesn’t cause global warming? The answer is no."

So what caused the initial global warming?, back this up with verifiable data.

From 400,000 years ago? No one can know for certain.

The scienceblog story you tell says that after (something) started the warming the oceans warmed releasing CO2 which then warmed the planet even more, oceans would then release water vapour which is a more potent GHG.

Luckily water vapor rains out in about 10 days and at high concentrations.

Explain the negative feedback. According to the theory (something) began the global warming releasing CO2 which then continued the warming, and in turn released CO2, which in turn would continue the warming.... If there was no negative feedback then we would see a continual rise in temp and CO2 since the last ice age.
That is simply not the case, explain how this negative feedback works and where is it today, where is negative feedback in the 21st century?

Increased convection may increase cloudiness at +6 -- which won't really matter as many, many people would be endangered and many populated parts of the Earth ruined.

 

[smilingsynic]

Quote from drjekyllus:

So lets close this thread already? Who are you, Al Gore saying the debate is over? It is funny how the MMGW cultist always want to shut the debate down. I wonder why that is.

Closing the thread will only help you save face. You're out of ammo, and WAY over your head. Indeed, you have nothing left other than name calling and conspiracy theories ("cultists"?).

Dave OWNED you. Accept your loss, like a good trader would, and move on.

 

[smilingsynic]

Quote from Arnie:

What thread were you reading?

I've never seen someone dodge and faint the way bigdumbdavetheidiot does.

And IF he were winning, why would want him to stop?

Arnie,

Like I told the other guy, all you are left with is name calling and logical fallacies. I suggest that you too accept your loss, like a good trader would, and move on.

 

[drjekyllus]

Quote from smilingsynic:

Closing the thread will only help you save face. You're out of ammo, and WAY over your head. Indeed, you have nothing left other than name calling and conspiracy theories ("cultists"?).

Dave OWNED you. Accept your loss, like a good trader would, and move on.

Yeah Dave OWNED me. Whatever. Its too bad the temperature didn't cooperate with Dave.

 

[bigdavediode]

Quote from drjekyllus:

Most of your posts don't ever have citations because most of the numbers you use, you just make up.

Well that's false, in fact I just cited the HadCRUT3 source data (which didn't match the site "landfortrees" cited by someone else.

In fact, the site is SO far off the actual data I think it's fair to say that the site is dishonest. Of course with a name like "landfortrees" it's probably for burning all trees and land.

I did find one post with an actual citation to realclimate.org which is hosted by Environmental Media Services, who have an obvious agenda. EMS was founded by Arlie Schardt who is tied to a host of greeny groups so yes, your souce was funded by "Big Green".

Nope. "RealClimate is not affiliated with any environmental organisations. Although our domain is being hosted by Environmental Media Services, and our initial press release was organised for us by Fenton Communications, neither organization was in any way involved in the initial planning for RealClimate, and have never had any editorial or other control over content. Neither Fenton nor EMS has ever paid any contributor to RealClimate.org any money for any purpose at any time. Neither do they pay us expenses, buy our lunch or contract us to do research. This information has always been made clear to anyone who asked."

 

[Arnie]

Quote from smilingsynic:

Arnie,

Like I told the other guy, all you are left with is name calling and logical fallacies. I suggest that you too accept your loss, like a good trader would, and move on.

Where are your pom-poms?

What are you? His little sister?

Dave never could prove that the rise in temps is caused by c02. Even he admitted that. The whole AGW theory is based on that. End of story. Everything else was puffery.

 

[bigdavediode]

Quote from drjekyllus:

Yeah Dave OWNED me. Whatever. Its too bad the temperature didn't cooperate with Dave.

Well yet again, here's all the monthly data, also broken down by season, and anyone can see that the temperature is increasing:

http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata/GLB.Ts+dSST.txt

 

[bigdavediode]

Quote from Arnie:

Where are your pom-poms?

What are you? His little sister?

Dave never could prove that the rise in temps is caused by c02. Even he admitted that. The whole AGW theory is based on that. End of story. Everything else was puffery.

Actually it's proven because it's the nature of the CO2 molecule to absorb IR in two different ways.

And because the atmosphere has more CO2, it will inevitably absorb more IR. QED.

I'm not sure how you can think this is not the case.

 

[bigdavediode]

Quote from Arnie:

What thread were you reading?

I've never seen someone dodge and faint the way bigdumbdavetheidiot does.

It's "feint," not "faint" and I'm not "feinting" but in fact have posted extensive reference material to primary sources (such as the temperature data above linked directly to NASA.)

 

[smilingsynic]

Quote from Arnie:

Where are your pom-poms?

What are you? His little sister?

Dave never could prove that the rise in temps is caused by c02. Even he admitted that. The whole AGW theory is based on that. End of story. Everything else was puffery.

LOL. Like I said, and you keeping backing me up, you have nothing left other than insults.

For goodness sakes, stop embarrassing yourself.