Register to Comment
Like Tree9064Likes
  1. #35891
    Earthling Earthling is offline
    Earthling's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    7,840

    Quote Originally Posted by owedtojoy View Post
    AI am pretty sure no one claimed there never were storms before anthropogenic climate change.
    That would be impossible, but you're witness to the fact that more catastrophists are saying storms are getting stronger and more frequent.

    Quote Originally Posted by owedtojoy View Post
    Nor can any single point event be ascribed to global warming, which is a long term process of change. Only statistical analysis of a time series of events can offer conclusions of that kind.
    That doesn't stop catastrophists from pointing at each and every extreme weather event as a suspect.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  2. #35892
    Steve Case Steve Case is offline
    Steve Case's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    1,549

    I thought this quip was pretty good:

    Walther11 • 11 hours ago
    When government buys art, you get things like P*ss Christ.
    Is it any wonder that when government buys science,
    you get Global Warming?
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  3. #35893
    SirCharles SirCharles is offline
    SirCharles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    11,292

    The Oceans Warmed up Sharply in 2013: We're Going to Need a Bigger Graph

    Because the oceans cover some 71% of the Earth's surface and are capable of retaining heat around a thousand times that of the atmosphere, the oceans are where most of the energy from global warming is going - 93.4% over recent decades. So greenhouse gases emitted by human industrial activity not only cause more heat to become trapped in the atmosphere, they also cause more of the sun's energy to accumulate in the oceans.

    Long-term the oceans have been gaining heat at a rate equivalent to about 2 Hiroshima bombs per second, although this has increased over the last 16 or so years to around 4 per second. In 2013 ocean warming rapidly escalated, rising to a rate in excess of 12 Hiroshima bombs per second - over three times the recent trend. This doesn't necessarily mean we are entering a period of greatly accelerated ocean warming, as there is substantial year-to-year variation in heat uptake by the oceans. It does, however, once again dispel the persistent myth of a pause in global warming, because the Earth has actually continued to warm faster in the last 16 years than it did in the preceding 16 years.

    As can be seen in Figure 1 below, the global oceans have warmed so quickly in 2013 that the National Oceanographic Data Center (NODC) is going to need a bigger graph.


    "Hiatus", my butt!
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  4. #35894
    owedtojoy owedtojoy is offline
    owedtojoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    24,743

    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Case View Post
    I thought this quip was pretty good:

    Walther11 • 11 hours ago
    When government buys art, you get things like P*ss Christ.
    Is it any wonder that when government buys science,
    you get Global Warming?
    Even the most stupid observer of various political scenes around the world can see that politicians as a class would just love the whole climate change thing to go away, and let them get back to taking money from fossil fuel interests without being exposed as corrupt and reckless.

    You must be a fairly obtuse conspiracy theorist to think otherwise.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  5. #35895
    Telemachus Telemachus is offline
    Telemachus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    7,794

    Quote Originally Posted by Earthling View Post
    That would be impossible, but you're witness to the fact that more catastrophists are saying storms are getting stronger and more frequent.

    That doesn't stop catastrophists from pointing at each and every extreme weather event as a suspect.
    Yeah its unrelenting, they have to make a lot of noise to keep the shakedown flowing :

    Polar - Vortex = climate change.

    Storm in Philippines/indonesia = climate change.

    Warmy researchers get trapped in ice off Antarctica = climate change.

    It would be funny if it wasnt so dangerous and expensive.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  6. #35896
    owedtojoy owedtojoy is offline
    owedtojoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    24,743

    Marc Morano vs Michael Mann

    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  7. #35897
    owedtojoy owedtojoy is offline
    owedtojoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    24,743

    IPCC responses to AR5 inputs are out. This one, a response to a notorious NZ climate science denier, goes like this:

    Rejected – The comment does not reflect the scientific understanding.

    The errors in individual observations are not additive; we are also doing relative analysis that eliminates many of the concerns about individual errors.

    The reviewer obviously has a limited understanding of the associated error evaluation for analysis of large datasets.

    See Chapter 2 for more on the evaluation of these datasets.

    Or maybe even read a basic textbook.


    http://www.climatechange2013.org/ima...nses_Final.pdf
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  8. #35898
    Volatire Volatire is offline
    Volatire's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    3,963

    He who controls the past controls the future. He who controls the present controls the past.

    - the motto of the Micheal Mann school of activist pseudo-science.
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  9. #35899
    Trainwreck Trainwreck is offline

    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    6,619

    Quote Originally Posted by owedtojoy View Post
    IPCC responses to AR5 inputs are out. This one, a response to a notorious NZ climate science denier, goes like this:

    Rejected – The comment does not reflect the scientific understanding.

    The errors in individual observations are not additive; we are also doing relative analysis that eliminates many of the concerns about individual errors.

    The reviewer obviously has a limited understanding of the associated error evaluation for analysis of large datasets.

    See Chapter 2 for more on the evaluation of these datasets.

    Or maybe even read a basic textbook.


    http://www.climatechange2013.org/ima...nses_Final.pdf
    Check out the typical shadey responses to reviews. Three monkeys approach:

    Yamal and IPCC AR4 Review Comments Climate Audit
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

  10. #35900
    Steve Case Steve Case is offline
    Steve Case's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    1,549

    Quote Originally Posted by owedtojoy View Post
    Sign in or Register Now to reply

Sign in to CommentRegister to Comment