Climat Change is not a commie myth.

[popeyespappy]

Picking years based upon centuries is letting that medieval guy who got the year of the birth of Jesus wrong set the rules. It is also interesting that anyone would consider US temps to be indicative of the world when it is such a small fraction of the world but that is a different discussion.

As you note the amount of red and blue changes but the impression given by this is that it matters in the least that deviations from a century long average exist. If in fact the zero is the average then the deviations from average are meaningless.

Remember the Romans grew Mediterranean grapes in Britain. While I expect the quality of the wine was commensurate with the food I have not heard of any such vineyards reopening. However I have read the temperatures in Britain declined from 1940 to 1975 and are now back where they were in 1940.

Again I have been following global climate change since it was the coming ice age. The heavy politicization of global melting which, embarrassingly, includes the scientists which is ordinarily an ethical violation.

So what’s your point, Methuselah? It doesn’t make a big difference if you pick a random point and graph a deviation from that point, or graph the temperature. The basic shape of the graph remains the same.

[orogenicman]

I've seen on several news sources the temp has not increased in the last 10 years, this is not my opinion, it comes from national news sources that were quoting scientists. I personally do not know what's happening to the planet, but it's apparent somethings going on.

It is a myth to believe that global temperatures have not increased, since most of the highest global temperatures of the last 100 years have occurred within the last ten years. Having said that, there has been an overall hiatus in the short-term warming trend (the last 7-8 years), and that has ONLY been seen in land temperatures. Including ocean temperatures, the increase has continued. And remember, global warming is a long term trend, not a short term variation. Moreover, even if there hasn't been an increase in the last ten years as has been claimed, the present global temperatures are still anomalous, meaning that they still above the running average. Between 2000 and 2009, it was hotter than 75% of the last 11,300 years. So global warming is still happening, and will very likely only get much worse at the present rate of GHG emissions.

---

Says the Anglican who probably couldn't distinguish a tree ring from a wedding ring.

[Godscreated]

Hey guys I was just repeating what the news networks were saying. I agree somethings going on, like I said I've noticed a change in the suns effect on my skin over the years and yes I know it's been warmer over the last several years, I use to work outside a lot. I just do not know what's causing the warming and scientist are not in total agreement either. But here it is nearly the first of May and another snowstorm heading across the mid-west. So what's next.

[Aractus]

---

---

Says the Anglican who probably couldn't distinguish a tree ring from a wedding ring.

OUCH! Oh I'm sorry, did I say something that you disagree with???

Or did you simply not understand the message?

[KichigaiNeko]

The point is pappy, that you can pick any point in the last 4 billion years and point to Co2 rises and falls that are higher or lower than today's readings. It's no biggie.


I DO object to the alarmist nature of proponents of "global warming" offering NO solution to our current dilemma.

[Aractus]

If we're in a dilemma that needs a solution to begin with.

• The Norwegian Nobel Institute has today made a statement affirming that climate scientist, Michael Mann lied when he claimed he was a joint winner of the Nobel Peace Prize. The news is set to render a devastating blow to all libel suits Mann has filed against critics of his outlandish global warming claims.
  
  
  Where once there was doubt now none remains
  
  Tom Richard investigating for Examiner.com takes the credit for this sensational scoop. Tom says, “I contacted the Norwegian Nobel Institute to find out if Mann was indeed a Nobel Laureate, winner, etc.” A prompt reply from Geir Lundestad, Director, Professor, of The Norwegian Nobel Institute was soon forthcoming. In no uncertain terms Lundestad affirmed, “Michael Mann has never been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.” Yet lo and behold Mann makes the claim that he has been “awarded the Nobel Peace Prize” in the complaint itself (page 2, paragraph 2).
  
  Mann and his hot shot lawyers have thus violated Rule 11(a)(1) and (3) over Mann’s dodgy affadavit submitted this week in the District of Columbia Court. He is now proven to have knowingly sought to mislead the court. In short, the offense is one of perjury. Blackstone’s law dictionary describes perjury as, “a crime committed when a lawful oath is administered, in some judicial proceeding, to a person who swears willfully, absolutely and falsely, in a matter material to the issue or point in question.”
  
  
  EXHIBIT A: Mann’s IPCC certificate displayed in his office proving he was a helper NOT a Nobel Laureate
  
  Earlier this week, Mark Steyn, a co-defendant in the latest Mann libel suit was scathing about Mann’s Nobel Prize claims. As to the IPCC “certificate” Mann proudly displays on his Facebook page as “proof” Lundestad had this to say, “Unfortunately we often experience that members of organizations that have indeed been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize issue various forms of personal diplomas to indicate that they personally have received the Nobel Peace Prize. They have not.”
  
  In essence, this new evidence shows that Mann will stoop to criminality to achieve his goals. He is now the veritable Lance Armstrong of climate science. Whether the court imposes a light or a harsh sanction the offense is a criminal act. As such, this is the best possible news for those Mann is suing for libel. Up till now there was only circumstantial evidence in the public domain to suggest the Penn State University (PSU) climatologist is guilty of academic fraud. But now with proof of perjury, Mann’s reputation sinks to an all time low with actual criminality established.
  
  For all their smart work in forum shopping the case to the District of Columbia courts, Mann’s lawyers now face a tortuous uphill battle to win over any judge and jury, let alone one under “biased” Judge Natalie Combs-Greene.
  
  In Canada this news may also impact Mann’s libel suit against fellow climatologist, Dr Tim Ball which has stalled since last year. That’s all because Mann refuses to provide courtroom examination of the dodgy data he has kept secret since he first concocted his infamous “hockey stick” graph that was trumpeted by the IPCC and others as “proof” human emissions of carbon dioxide were dangerously changing the climate.
  
  You can imagine Mark Steyn, Rand Simberg and the folks at National Review and the Competitive Enterprise Institute will today be convulsant with laughter at the news.
  
  

Lest we forget.

• 
  
  

^ That's the Ad that was published in The Daily Collegian - Penn State's student newspaper which is archived on the Collegian's online site here:

Mr Mann must be so proud!

[orogenicman]

In fact, the Nobel prize was awarded to the IPCC. The IPCC then presented Mann (as well as the many other authors of the IPCC report) with a personalized certificate "for contributing to the award of the Nobel Peace Prize for 2007 to the IPCC", celebrating the joint award of the Nobel Peace Prize to the IPCC (and its authors) and to Al Gore. The number of climate deniers who have received ANY kind of award for their (non-) contributions to climate science = 0.

---

Says the Anglican who probably couldn't distinguish a tree ring from a wedding ring.

OUCH! Oh I'm sorry, did I say something that you disagree with???

Or did you simply not understand the message?

Oh yes, your message was very clear. If you can't refute the science, shoot the scientist. Congratulations.

---

The point is pappy, that you can pick any point in the last 4 billion years and point to Co2 rises and falls that are higher or lower than today's readings. It's no biggie.

In fact, no one can point to any point in the last 4 billion years and "point to Co2 rises and falls that are higher or lower than today's readings" because we don't have the resolution in the data going back that far that would give us confidence to come to such a conclusion. But even if we could, that's not the point at all. The point is that our GHG emissions are causing tremendous damage to the environment in which WE live today, and will do so for the foreseeable future. The point is that we owe it to our children, their children, all other life forms, and the planet itself to mitigate the damage we've done. After all, it is the only planet we can call our home.

I DO object to the alarmist nature of proponents of "global warming" offering NO solution to our current dilemma.

Actually, scientists have been saying for at least 30 years what needs to be done.

[Aractus]

Yes I believe I posted a picture of that letter from the IPCC above for contributing to the award, FYI it's not a joint award - it's an award awarded to the IPCC.

And I don't need to refute any science. In fact I don't even understand why you said that?

[orogenicman]

Hey guys I was just repeating what the news networks were saying. I agree somethings going on, like I said I've noticed a change in the suns effect on my skin over the years and yes I know it's been warmer over the last several years, I use to work outside a lot. I just do not know what's causing the warming and scientist are not in total agreement either. But here it is nearly the first of May and another snowstorm heading across the mid-west. So what's next.

Most scientists do, in fact, have an understanding of the greenhouse effect (a demonstrable natural phenomenon), and agree that you cannot pump 6 billion tons and increasing of GHGs into the world's atmosphere every year and have no effect on the atmosphere. The atmosphere does not exist in isolation from humanity. They are having measurable negative effects. And given the fact that the Carbon cycle takes about 100 years to go full circle, those effects will be around with us for quite some time to come.

---

Yes I believe I posted a picture of that letter from the IPCC above for contributing to the award, FYI it's not a joint award - it's an award awarded to the IPCC.

And I don't need to refute any science. In fact I don't even understand why you said that?

In fact, it was a joint award given to the authors of the 2007 IPCC climate report and Al Gore. Mann was one of those authors, and received a certificate from the IPCC in recognition of his efforts that contributed to the award, as were all the other authors. End of story.

Of course you don't need to refute any science. Given that it is highly doubtful that you could argue the issue with a 10 year old, I can understand your reluctance.

[KichigaiNeko]

The language is still emotional and alarmist orogenicman. And still we have no real solutions on how to adapt/ minimise/ survive; which is my main point.