[MOVED from AP]2014 Warmest Year on Record Since 1880

[eclipsenow]

.

Alarmism ?

Yep.

Doom and Gloom?

Yep.

Scientifically factual ?

No.

When people fail to integrate GHG radiation physics into the thousands of other major climate-regulating factors, well, they lose perspective of the interconnected and interdependent relationships of the whole.

The above quote should teach people about Extremists and Alarmism: those that promote only one side, all the negatives, and their lack of first factoring out natural variability causation.

.

Thousands of other climate-regulating factors? I dare you to name 10 without googling them! Go on. Be honest with us and try naming 10. Then look up what real, professional climatologists say about the top climate forcings and what effect they're having now.

The reality is you don't know, don't care, and just want to stick your fingers in your ears and pout "No no NO!" while stomping your foot. It might have been cute when you were 2, but now that you have internet access and are debating what you THINK is politics (when in fact it's just physics and chemistry) makes me imagine that you're at least a teenager.

Once again, try answering the questions!

Will you agree that a Fourier device can measure the amount of thermal energy CO2 re-radiates?
Will you agree that we can accurately count how much CO2 is in the atmosphere now, and run the radiative forcing equation (mathematics) to work out it is trapping an extra 4 Hiroshima bombs / second, which across our very large planet works out to be about 1 Christmas tree light per meter?
Will you admit the seasons are changing with trees and bees doing their things earlier for Spring and winter arriving later? (Generally speaking, apart from 'Drunken Arctic' events in North America where global warming has destabilised the jet stream).
Will you agree that photographic evidence shows glaciers to be decreasing?
Will you agree that satellites also record the world's temperatures warming?
Will you agree that fire seasons around the world are changing, and droughts are getting worse, and that the physics of atmospheric hydrology allow an extra 5% moisture to be carried for every 1 degree of temperature increase?
Will you agree that the multi-year thick ice is retreating at the poles?
Will you agree with SCIENCE for once and stop projecting your political worldview all over the data so much that you can't even see it?

 

[eclipsenow]

You know what would be devistating to your point? If 7 years ago there was a peer reviewed paper predicting the pause. One that was then covered by a major media source. And then, I don't know, linked to on this site. By me.

http://www.christianforums.com/t7218483/

Hey, I even predicted that climate deniers would try and say that it disproved global warming!

Ouch! Hurts to be him right now!

 

[eclipsenow]

.

And by trying to prove me wrong by "tweaked graphs" that starts in 1980 you have proved"No Pause", that even the Climate Elite of CAGW have faced up to, even James Hansen?

Go figure. More misinformation, and you know it.

No, you have continued in "Elite-ism", talking downwards to others as mentioned to you many months ago and why I do not reply to your posts. For example, look at your last sentence above.

.

Dude, the denialists take this graph from 1998, so please don't talk to us about 'tweaked'. But yes, please go find a graph from the 1900's onwards. It will be very revealing for you.

 

[hurste1951]

Ouch! Hurts to be him right now!

Doubtful. I believe that Heissonear is so prideful that nothing anyone says that disagrees with his "impressions" can make a dent.

Such is pride.

 

[Heissonear]

.

Trying to attain one temperature value for the entire earth is realistically rediculous.

The temperature is CONSTANTLY CHANGING AT EVER LOCATION on earth throughout each day.

Go figure.

Equating such to be Meaningful Data is ignorance and futility.

To state earth's temperature for any given period of time is pseudo-science. To compare the year 2000 to 1965 or 2012 is shady science, and to claim such to 2 decimal places accuracy!

Forget your anomalies from incomplete, inaccurate databases, in which you trust!

Only in "Climatology" and "Climate Science" do we see such shady science.


.

 

[[serious]]

.

Trying to attain one temperature value for the entire earth is realistically rediculous.

Which is why no one is doing that. As we have been over countless times.

Anomaly, not absolute temperature.

 

[hurste1951]

Forget your anomalies from incomplete, inaccurate databases, in which you trust!

Only in "Climatology" and "Climate Science" do we see such shady science.

^^^^THIS IS INCORRECT^^^^^^

In GEOLOGY (note that Heissonear claims to be a geochemist, we have something called BOREHOLE DATA.

The data from BOREHOLES is CORRELATED to other boreholes nearby or not so nearby. This is called CORRELATION.

Unlike Heissonear I guess, I've actually done this for a living.

Here's an example of what CORRELATION in geology looks like. It is called a FENCE DIAGRAM.

NOTE THE LITTLE "TUBES" YOU SEE ARE THE ACTUAL DATA POINTS (where they know the type of rock and details about it. The BIG "FENCES" BETWEEN THEM ARE INTERPOLATED DATA ABOUT WHAT THE FORMATION ACTUALLY IS.

This is almost exactly like what Heissonear claims ONLY happens in Climate Science.

Now I ask: WHO IS HIDING WHAT IN THIS CONVERSATION?

Here's another example! The spaces in between the "columns" are INTERPOLATED data as to what the formation does.

 

[HerbieHeadley]

I sit here wishing there was at least a .8 degree of temperature more warmth.

Anyone....

Bueler....

 

[DaisyDay]

I sit here wishing there was at least a .8 degree of temperature more warmth.

Anyone....

Bueler....

[pong][sign] Local Weather Is Not Global Climate [/sign][/pong]

 

[HerbieHeadley]

[pong][sign] Local Weather Is Not Global Climate [/sign][/pong]

That's cute, Daisy.

 

[USincognito]

I sit here wishing there was at least a .8 degree of temperature more warmth.

Well there you go folks. It's cold, where Herbie lives, in January. Clearly global warming is a hoax.

 

[HerbieHeadley]

Well there you go folks. It's cold, where Herbie lives, in January. Clearly global warming is a hoax.

Lol, you.

 

[FreedByte]

Well there you go folks. It's cold, where Herbie lives, in January. Clearly global warming is a hoax.

Didn't you hear? They changed the name from "global warming" to "local warming".

 

[Heissonear]

Well there you go folks. It's cold, where Herbie lives, in January. Clearly global warming is a hoax.

.

With incomplete weather collection sites across the world, that gather sparse data collections over the years, you cannot obtain "Global" values that are real.

As you mentioned, only "localized data" to base claims of theories on.
.

 

[HerbieHeadley]

.

With incomplete weather collection sites across the world, that gather sparse data collections over the years, you cannot obtain "Global" values that are real.

As you mentioned, only "localized data" to base claims of theories on.
.

This is so true. I like the way you think.

 

[Loudmouth]

.

With incomplete weather collection sites across the world, that gather sparse data collections over the years, you cannot obtain "Global" values that are real.

As you mentioned, only "localized data" to base claims of theories on.
.

Do you require every square foot of the Earth to have a temperature guage?

Please show us why the data is incapable of giving us a reliable picture of global climate.