Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Global warming at a standstill


Von Bismarck

Recommended Posts

I showed you the global data.

you picked the cherries.

You picked the big cherry by concentrating on one statistic which proved your point - and ignoring all the others which show the actual detailed context. Nice try :tu:

Br Cornelius

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You picked the big cherry by concentrating on one statistic which proved your point - and ignoring all the others which show the actual detailed context. Nice try :tu:

Br Cornelius

you are projecting.

http://en.wikipedia....ical_projection

it was you that highlighted precipitation when i asked you what extreme events you were referring to, global data actually shows a decline not an increase.

what "others" are you referring to? present some data if you have a point to make.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

you are projecting.

http://en.wikipedia....ical_projection

it was you that highlighted precipitation when i asked you what extreme events you were referring to, global data actually shows a decline not an increase.

what "others" are you referring to? present some data if you have a point to make.

Little Fish , if you don't want to understand what is happening then ignore the increase in extreme precipitation events across all regions and focus on your single stat. Thats the difference between me and you, I want to understand whats happening - you want to further your global control agenda.

"It is clear that climate change will change the UK's weather, says the Met Office's Pope, although it is too early to say exactly how the nation's complex weather patterns will be affected. But some predictions can be reasonably made, she says: "It is basic physics that warmer air can hold more water, so when you get rain, it is likely to be heavier. We have already seen over the last 50 years that there are more extreme rain events now."

http://www.guardian....ather-dangerous

PS- that graph you linked to - more cherry picking of time intervals. Care to share ist source.

Br Cornelius

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bob Tidsdale - need I say more :tu: .

I gave you scientific papers - you gave me crap (41 minuits of my life which I would never get back).

Br Cornelius

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

PS- that graph you linked to - more cherry picking of time intervals. Care to share ist source.

http://bobtisdale.fi...png?w=960&h=624

it's noaas cams opi satellite precipitation data which has been in operation since 1979.

the graph shows ALL the data available since it has been in operation.

do you want me to apologise for not showing the satellite data prior to 1979 when it didn't exist?

...or maybe you just don't understand what "cherry picking" means.

Edited by Little Fish
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://bobtisdale.fi...png?w=960&h=624

it's noaas cams opi satellite precipitation data which has been in operation since 1979.

the graph shows ALL the data available since it has been in operation.

do you want me to apologise for not showing the satellite data prior to 1979 when it didn't exist?

...or maybe you just don't understand what "cherry picking" means.

Just the respect of showing sources so that I can check that its not just more cherry picked rubbish from the lunatic fringe :tu:

Br Cornelius

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the source was and is printed on the graph. do you dispute it?

Context is everything and graphs can be altered in numerous ways.

Forgive me if I don't actually trust you at this stage :whistle:

Br Cornelius

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Context is everything and graphs can be altered in numerous ways.

so you don't believe Noaa's global precipitation data?
Forgive me if I don't actually trust you at this stage :whistle:
I didn't create the data. you are the one claiming to be a climate scientist, if you dispute it then then show some of your own data. your beliefs are based on data aren't they? you being a scientist and all, right?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

is this good? legit question, i seriously don't know what this means.

Honestly? it doesn't really matter, we still have problems.

The real issue is the earth energy balance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

so you don't believe Noaa's global precipitation data?

I didn't create the data. you are the one claiming to be a climate scientist, if you dispute it then then show some of your own data. your beliefs are based on data aren't they? you being a scientist and all, right?

Of course they are based on data. That is why I always try to look at the broadest range of data available before drawing rash conclusions.

You on the other hand are a notorious cherry picker of one particular piece of data which supports an arguing point, and ignores the broad sweep of data which points to the opposite conclusion. You have also been known to use source material which has been doctored by skeptics rather than going back to the original data source.

I think my concerns about taking your word for anything are well founded.

Br Cornelius

Link to comment
Share on other sites

so you don't believe Noaa's global precipitation data?

According to NOAA, the US just had it's hottest, dryest year ever. Of course, that doesn't count three worse droughts we know about from the tree-ring record.

Doug

Link to comment
Share on other sites

More drought + More floods = No change in average precipitation

Br Cornelius

Not necessarily. It depends on which one was greater. More droughts or floods. It's man's arrogance that allows us to think we can greatly affect the climate. We can nudge it, but the temperatures were going to rise with or without us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not necessarily. It depends on which one was greater. More droughts or floods. It's man's arrogance that allows us to think we can greatly affect the climate. We can nudge it, but the temperatures were going to rise with or without us.

Nothing changes without a cause. It is a falsy to think that natural causes have not been considered when coming to the conclusion that we are the main cause now. Natural causes have been considered and accounted for - and what we have left is the residual AGW forcing.

Br Cornelius

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not to be 'that guy' but since we're a natural species of Earth, technically anything we do is natural. Just cause it's not beneficial to everything doesn't mean it's not natural. Systems go out of balance all the time, sometimes because of the continents moving, sometimes because of an animal species. It's natural, even if we are causing it.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This news about global warming are all lies... one day it is at extreme rise the second day it's stalling... WTH?

Make your minds is it growing or reducing?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bob Tidsdale - need I say more :tu: .

Attack the arguer not the argument. Typical strategy of a person who has lost an argument.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Attack the arguer not the argument. Typical strategy of a person who has lost an argument.

The arguer is a hack and I am expected to waste 40 minuits of my life proving that point.

I based my argument on scientific papers - Little Fish produced an amateur blogger - need I say more.

Bobs neat little idea basically comes down to - the oceans are simple spontaniously warming all by themselves with no decernable source of energy input, which in turn is warming the atmosphere- look its magic !! Of course in order to take this position you have to completely ignore the net energy imbalance at the top of the atmosphere - which is coincidently a source of energy which would be driving the magical rise in ocean heat content - except its not magic, its simple physics.

By the way - where do you think the energy which is accumulating, due to the imbalance at the top of the atmosphere, is ending up ??

Br Cornelius

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wish they would make up their minds about this global warming stuff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

According to NOAA, the US just had it's hottest, dryest year ever. Of course, that doesn't count three worse droughts we know about from the tree-ring record.

Doug

According to NOAA we were supposed to have seen 10 inches of snow yesterday.

We got none.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wish they would make up their minds about this global warming stuff.

They will.

As soon as they get you to buy several of those $50 LED light bulbs for your home and get you buy an electric car.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Every time i hear people yell the sky is falling over climate change it makes me cringe.

All data used to show how we are on the verge of death and destruction ends up being data mined from the past 200 years and you know what it shows?

Yep, its warming.

But what happens if we look back 1000 years? You know, maybe check and see if warming and cooling doesn't just happen in cycles naturally?

Wow, what do you know, we aren't even at the Medieval Warming high point yet.

Forgive me if i ignore things that i cant change while others use fear mongering to make a buck i.e Al "Jazeera" Gore.

http://www.c3headlines.com/are-todays-temperatures-unusual/

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.