AGW/Climate Change Debate 2016

The place to discuss politics and policy issues that are not directly related to matters of faith.

Moderator: Jon Estes

AGW/Climate Change Debate 2016

Postby David Flick » Sun Jan 03, 2016 4:12 am

.
.
          AGW/Climate Change Debate 2016

    Happy New Year! Anno Domini 2016 is here. The hands on the clocks continue to move. Digits on the digital clocks continue to click by second following second. Time moves on. Nothing stops. Oh wait a second
    (pun intended). Yes, there is something that has stopped. Global warming stopped dead in its tracks 18 years and 9 months ago. The Arctic ice stopped melting 4 years ago (in 2012).

    Time to begin a new thread AGW/Climate Change thread. The last thread, this one, is nearly 5 months old (began 8/21/15). As of 3:05 this morning (1/3/16), it has gathered 117 Replies and 2101 Views. It's time to put it out to pasture and plow new ground. We archive it. Here's the post...

              ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    User avatar
    David Flick
    Site Admin
     
    Posts: 8490
    Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 12:55 pm
    Location: Oklahoma City, OK

    Re: AGW/Climate Change Debate 2016

    Postby KeithE » Sun Jan 03, 2016 9:17 am

    I’ll resolve to use the word “skeptic” in place of “denialist" in 2016. David can continue to use the word “alarmist" since a true alarm is more than appropriate.

    Cartoons do little to advance understanding and mainly tries to enflame.

    But I’ll post more about this cartoon (and the 2015 DATA) this afternoon. I see where this feud apparently entertains many here at BL.
    Informed by Data.
    Driven by the SPIRIT and JESUS’s Example.
    Promoting the Kingdom of GOD on Earth.
    User avatar
    KeithE
    Site Admin
     
    Posts: 9320
    Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 8:02 pm
    Location: Huntsville, AL

    Re: AGW/Climate Change Debate 2016

    Postby KeithE » Sun Jan 03, 2016 11:27 pm

    David Flick wrote:.
    .
            AGW/Climate Change Debate 2016

      Happy New Year! Anno Domini 2016 is here. The hands on the clocks continue to move. Digits on the digital clocks continue to click by second following second. Time moves on. Nothing stops. Oh wait a second
      (pun intended). Yes, there is something that has stopped. Global warming stopped dead in its tracks 18 years and 9 months ago. The Arctic ice stopped melting 4 years ago (in 2012).

      Time to begin a new thread AGW/Climate Change thread. The last thread, this one, is nearly 5 months old (began 8/21/15). As of 3:05 this morning (1/3/16), it has gathered 117 Replies and 2101 Views. It's time to put it out to pasture and plow new ground. We archive it. Here's the post...

                ---------------------------------------------------------------------------



      I’ll challenge David to find an “alarmist” who says there will be “No Snow”, “No Hurricanes” or “Colder Winters” due to global warming.

      NOAA keeps records of severe weather. They say there has been more severe droughts than average since 1974 - see Plot of the Palmer Drought Severity Index (PDSI) below (red line):
      Image

      and the number of heavy precipitation events has been increasing since 1977 - See plot below (red line):
      Image

      So your wheel of misfortune should have a “wet” and “dry” category but not so for “colder winters”, “no hurricanes” or “no snow”. That is in the cartoonist's imagination.

      As for 2015:
      1) There have been many very extreme weather events. Here are 10 of them.

      2) 2015 has been the hottest year on record - final data not yet available but from Dec 1, 2014 through Nov 30, 2015, the global average surface air temperature is up 0.11C from the previous Dec-Nov year. Page to the bottom of http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata_v3/GLB.Ts+dSST.txt and look under the column “D-N”. Note also that Oct and Nov 2015 are the only months over “100” (=1C) of the baseline (1951-1980 average).

      Here is a plot of the J-D temps through 2014. 2015 will be literally off the chart (that is above 0.8C, probably above 0.84C if Dec comes in above “78” and it will with El Nino going on).

      Image

      Thus 2015 will replace 2014 as the hottest year ever.

      This plot shows that there has been no “hiatus” at the surface level since 1997. Look at red line (5 year averages) Perhaps a slow down in rate of increase, but that will change when 2015 results are plotted (both red line and black line). Not sure what the Lower Troposphere satellite data will say but that refers to a higher attitude temp data and is not as indicative as the surface data for climate effects (but all DATA matters).
      Informed by Data.
      Driven by the SPIRIT and JESUS’s Example.
      Promoting the Kingdom of GOD on Earth.
      User avatar
      KeithE
      Site Admin
       
      Posts: 9320
      Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 8:02 pm
      Location: Huntsville, AL

      Re: AGW/Climate Change Debate 2016

      Postby David Flick » Mon Jan 04, 2016 8:55 pm

              Image

          Rush’s Global Warming Armageddon Clock About to Hit Zero After 10 Years

        Ben Graham

        Al Gore, the “mastermind” behind “An Inconvenient Truth,” predicted a fiery cataclysm that would end the human race in just a single decade.

        Gore's prediction was made in 2006, and those who with an elementary level of knowledge of mathematics can deduce that we have reached the deadline.

        Radio personality Rush Limbaugh was so amused by the apocalyptic premonition that, on Jan. 27, 2006, he decided to start a countdown to "Armageddon."

        "You know, Al is a funny guy, but he's also a very serious guy who believes humans may have only 10 years left to save the planet from turning into a total frying pan,” Limbaugh said nearly 10 years ago.

        “The last time I heard some liberal talk about ‘10 years’ it was 1988, Ted Danson. We had 10 years to save the oceans; we were all going to pay the consequences, which would result in our death. Now Al Gore says we've got 10 years. 10 years left to save the planet from a scorching. Okay, we're going to start counting. This is January 27th, 2006. We will begin the count, ladies and gentlemen.”

        According to that countdown clock, we only have 22 days and some hours until Gore believes we’ve reached “the point of no return.”

        Continue reading...


      User avatar
      David Flick
      Site Admin
       
      Posts: 8490
      Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 12:55 pm
      Location: Oklahoma City, OK

      Re: AGW/Climate Change Debate 2016

      Postby David Flick » Tue Jan 05, 2016 3:46 am

      KeithE wrote:1I’ll resolve to use the word “skeptic” in place of “denialist" in 2016. 2David can continue to use the word “alarmist" since a true alarm is more than appropriate.
        1) Why change the terminology now? Everyone here on BL.Com knows that you really intend for "skeptic" to be virtually synonymous with "denialist." A quick search through the archives reveals that the term "denialist" has been used at least 282 times in your posts. Although I didn't dig through all of the posts wherein the term is used, perhaps not all have been written by you. But you have written the term far and away more than any other here on BL.Com...

        2) What, pray tell, is there to be alarmed about concerning either AGW or manmade climate change? Neither global warming nor climate change is the product of human activity. Global warming alarmism and climate change alarmism are both irrational fears. There isn't a thing that you, or Al Gore, or James Hansen, or Bill McKibbon, or John Kerry, or Barack Obama, or all the King's men can do that will make an ounce of difference in global warming or climate change. Fear of global warming and climate change is both absurd and senseless.

      Cartoons do little to advance understanding and mainly tries to enflame.
        Political cartoons have been around for hundreds of years. In fact, a fellow by the name of William Hogarth (1697-1764) is credited with pioneering western political cartoons. Political cartoons combine artistic skill, hyperbole and satire in order to question authority and draw attention to corruption and other social ills. I use them here to illustrate the absurdity of global warming alarmism. Here's one specifically geared to Chicken Little global warming alarmism. It does a fine job of making my point. If my political cartoons grate on your nerves so much, I invite you to come up with your own to match mine. :D
            Image

      But I’ll post more about this cartoon (and the 2015 DATA) this afternoon. I see where this feud apparently entertains many here at BL.
        I see the discussion more as a debate than a "feud." But you're correct about popularity of our threads. The global warming/climate change threads are consistently read by more people than any other. Frankly I enjoy posting in these threads. Primarily to bring awareness to the absurdity of global warming/climate change alarmism...
      User avatar
      David Flick
      Site Admin
       
      Posts: 8490
      Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 12:55 pm
      Location: Oklahoma City, OK

      Re: AGW/Climate Change Debate 2016

      Postby David Flick » Wed Jan 06, 2016 6:47 am

      .
      .
            Image
        This is going to be really good (if you happen to be an AGW/Climate Change skeptic, or... one of those evil, stupid denialists). CFACT (Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow) has produced a documentary that exposes the global warming con job propaganda. I've contributed to CFACT to help produce the documentary. Furthermore, I've signed up to receive updates about Climate Hustle about news and theatrical and home video releases. Did it here.

        I plan to have my own copy of the video and will view it in a theater when it gets within 20 miles of my house... Below are two articles about the documentary. The first is a review that appeared on the New American website. The second is a feeble attempt to debunk the documentary. The DeSmogBlog article has a video at the bottom wherein a fast-talking alarmist guy attempts to say that the documentary is nothing more than "the same tired old climate science denial myths repackaged.." I report, you decide... :D

        First the New American Review, followed by the DeSmogBlog article...
        Tuesday, 29 December 2015
        Documentary “Climate Hustle” Exposes Global-warming Con Job

        Written by Alex Newman

        PARIS — For all those who still have to deal with that crazy uncle over the Christmas season who insists that human emissions of the gas of life, or carbon dioxide, are causing dangerous global warming, fear not — the solution has arrived. It is called Climate Hustle, and it masterfully debunks the claims of the “climate cult,” as many experts now refer to the alarmist movement, like no other resource produced thus far. Well-known analysts are already saying it will turn the tables on the alarmists. But more importantly, it will bring to light the facts and the science surrounding alleged man-made global warming that the establishment press has tried so hard to conceal.

        The new documentary, which premiered in Paris this month amid the United Nations COP21 “climate change” summit, will serve as the perfect antidote to the increasingly shrill global-warming alarmism being peddled by the UN, the Obama administration, and others. It will also be exactly the tool you need to educate any remaining global-warming alarmists you may know, particularly those who got their inaccurate beliefs from error-riddled propaganda films such as Al Gore's discredited “documentary” An Inconvenient Truth, which was essentially banned in U.K. schools after a court recognized it was filled with falsehoods and ordered that children be warned about them in advance.

        Continue reading...


        Scientists Slam Movie Clip from Marc Morano’s Climate Hustle Documentary as “Patently Stupid” and Misleading

        By Graham Readfearn • Tuesday, January 5, 2016 - 22:58

        Marc Morano has been promising that his new documentary Climate Hustle will be released in theatres across the United States early in 2016.

        Whether or not the full-time climate science denialist will be able to make good his promise remains to be seen, but the film has been getting predictable support from conservative media and denialist bloggers.

        Morano works full-time for the “think tank” the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow (CFACT) and runs a clunky website ClimateDepot.com to promote climate science denial.

        So far, Morano has promised the film will “rock the climate debate”.

        DeSmog was told by CFACT it would not be able see the film when it got its “premiere” in Paris in early December because the small Cinema du Pantheon move theatre was full. But DeSmog was told by sources that the cinema was “half empty” during the screening.

        But even before an official release, the details about the film that have been released suggest it will be the same tired old climate science denial myths repackaged.

        Continue reading...
      User avatar
      David Flick
      Site Admin
       
      Posts: 8490
      Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 12:55 pm
      Location: Oklahoma City, OK

      Re: AGW/Climate Change Debate 2016

      Postby KeithE » Wed Jan 06, 2016 10:52 am

      David Flick wrote:
              Image

          Rush’s Global Warming Armageddon Clock About to Hit Zero After 10 Years

        Ben Graham

        Al Gore, the “mastermind” behind “An Inconvenient Truth,” predicted a fiery cataclysm that would end the human race in just a single decade.

        Gore's prediction was made in 2006, and those who with an elementary level of knowledge of mathematics can deduce that we have reached the deadline.

        Radio personality Rush Limbaugh was so amused by the apocalyptic premonition that, on Jan. 27, 2006, he decided to start a countdown to "Armageddon."

        "You know, Al is a funny guy, but he's also a very serious guy who believes humans may have only 10 years left to save the planet from turning into a total frying pan,” Limbaugh said nearly 10 years ago.

        “The last time I heard some liberal talk about ‘10 years’ it was 1988, Ted Danson. We had 10 years to save the oceans; we were all going to pay the consequences, which would result in our death. Now Al Gore says we've got 10 years. 10 years left to save the planet from a scorching. Okay, we're going to start counting. This is January 27th, 2006. We will begin the count, ladies and gentlemen.”

        According to that countdown clock, we only have 22 days and some hours until Gore believes we’ve reached “the point of no return.”

        Continue reading...



      The "Continue Reading ... " link had only one sentence and it was from that recognized expert in GW/CC, Rush Limbaugh.

      Al Gore did not say as the article above says:
      "Now Al Gore says we've got 10 years. 10 years left to save the planet from a scorching.”
      That was Rush Limbaugh.

      What he did say at the Jan 2006 Sundance Film Festival when his documentary “An Inconvenient Truth” was previewed:

      And politicians and corporations have been ignoring the issue for decades, to the point that unless drastic measures to reduce greenhouse gases are taken within the next 10 years, the world will reach a point of no return


      Nor did Ted Danson say in 1988 that
      we have 10 years to save the ocean; we were all going to pay the consequences, which would result in our death.
      Limbaugh greatly amended that.

      Danson did say correctly that “we had ten years to save the oceans” by which i think he meant the ocean’s health will degrade a lot if we do not change our ways soon. Not that it would result in our death as Limbaugh amended. And Danson was right.
      Coral cover in Glover’s Reef dropped from 80% in 1971 to 13% in 1999.
      (similar losses worldwide).
      The Oceans have been acidifying since at least 1960.
      40% of Photplankton - the bottom of the food chain - has died since 1950.
      Ocean Fisheries are depleting.


      We do not yet know whether or not the oceans or the world have “reached a point of no return”.

      Gore’s point was “politicians and corporations" will have to take drastic measures within 10 years else the eventual effects of the extra CO2 (and other ghg’s) we have been emitting to the atmosphere (and eventually settles in the oceans) will substantially degrade our habitat. Not that such imagined effects (like the earth will be scorched) will happen within 10 years. One can always count on a Rush Limbaugh or climate skeptics to twist words in anyway to make their foes look wrong.

      If one has to make up or exaggerate quotes to satirize them, the joke is on themselves.

      What is so astounding is that GW skeptics are so quick to believe such twisted words. One would think “skeptics” (usually thought to be thorough and thoughtful) would take more care with accurate quotes and context. Guess they are just susceptible to just about any words that tickle their fancy.

      I do not have the film An Inconvenient Truth (to check on surrounding context) but I do have the book. I could not find any precise prognostication of when serious GW effects would occur (mostly shows the ugly trends up until then- 2005). The closest to any prognostication is the maps of what coastline areas would eventually be flooded (pages 196-211) if Greenland or the West Antarctica Ice Shelf were to melt. He gave no year when that might happen.

      Now on to some technical points about what a “point of no return" means.

      CO2 half-life in the atmosphere is 27 years and modeled as an exponential. It’s half life in the ocean is immeasurably long (most think of it as 10,000 years or longer). Thus the full effects of the reckless amounts of CO2 we have added to the atmosphere (well outside of the 180-300 ppm natural cycle extrema) are a long time coming.

      Image
      And it is now over 400 ppm.

      But because of the half-life of CO2 (particularly in the oceans) is so long, the full effects from the emissions we have now over natural levels are just beginning to unfold. So the time to call Gore a “false alarmist” is really hundreds a years away but the “point of no return” may very well already occurred. We simply must make the best of it belatedly by reducing that 400 ppm preferably back into the natural range of 180-300 ppm.

      In truth Gore has already been proven right already since the effects on our climate extremes, our oceans, our health are already large and growing. Climate Change Kills 400,000 a Year, New Report Reveals. Don’t know if i believe that number but clearly it is a far greater problem than terrorism, now.

      End technical stuff.

      In summary, Gore (knowing the great difficulty of getting national agreement / international agreement a snap compared to Republican intransigence) was pleading for measures such as ghg’s emission control and alternative energy within 10 years to protect against far term harmful effects - not that the “earth will be scorched” in 10 years.
      Informed by Data.
      Driven by the SPIRIT and JESUS’s Example.
      Promoting the Kingdom of GOD on Earth.
      User avatar
      KeithE
      Site Admin
       
      Posts: 9320
      Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 8:02 pm
      Location: Huntsville, AL

      Re: AGW/Climate Change Debate 2016

      Postby David Flick » Sun Jan 10, 2016 4:25 am

      KeithE wrote:12015 has been the hottest year on record - final data not yet available but from Dec 1, 2014 through Nov 30, 2015, the global average surface air temperature is up 0.11C from the previous Dec-Nov year. 2Page to the bottom of http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata_v3/GLB.Ts+dSST.txt and look under the column “D-N”. Note also that Oct and Nov 2015 are the only months over “100” (=1C) of the baseline (1951-1980 average).

        1) No, Keith, 2015 wasn't the hottest year on record. It wasn't even close to being the hottest year on record. Your penchant for believing alarmist propaganda about AGW/CC propaganda is astonishing. You have a tendency to believe any and all bogus predictions coming from loudest and most vocal alarmists on the planet. Actually, 2015 was the only the 3rd warmest year on record. (I'll expand on this point below.)

        2) Way to go, Keith! Just a link to the NASA GISS data source, one that contains data which is indecipherable by anyone except a computer. Do you actually think anyone here on BL.Com is impressed that you are able post a document containing 135 years of temperature sets that (without a computer) can possibly be easily deciphered. There's major problem with
        the data set you cited. It's the very same data set that has been manipulated on numerous occasions by James Hansen and fiends. He and his minions manipulated the data to promote the alarming narrative of AGW. Documentation of Hansen and NASA GISS's manipulated data can be found here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, and here,

        The climate change alarmists have gone to great lengths to "prove" the bogus point that 2015 was the hottest year on record. They've successfully duped the "true believers," who have fallen hook, line and sinker for the propaganda.

      1Here is a plot of the J-D temps through 2014. 22015 will be literally off the chart (that is above 0.8C, probably above 0.84C if Dec comes in above “78” 3and it will with El Nino going on).

        1) Yes, and the the graph was created by NASA GISS, which is the same source from where this data set was came. A quick glance of the url for the graph demonstrates this: ---> http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs_v3/Fig.A2.gif . You've cited a graph and a data set from NASA GISS, both of which are based on manipulated data. There can be neither accuracy nor honesty correlated with such data or graphs.

        2) Sorry to brust your bubble, but 2015 will not be off the chart. That was confirmed just last week. (More on this point below.)

        3) I find it amusing that you continually talk of the current El Niño as if it were most dangerous or terrible ever. Actually, records show there have been warmer El Niños. For example, the last time an El Niño of this magnitude occurred was in 1998, the warmest year in the satellite record.
        But this current El Niño still ranks third when compared to the ones that occurred since 1950, when recordkeeping began. (Source: 2nd paragraph, this article)

      Thus 2015 will replace 2014 as the hottest year ever.
        Nope. Not true at all. 2015 will not replace 2014 as the hottest year on record. Actually, 2014 was not the, so-called, previous hottest year on record. Roy Spencer has confirmed that 2015 was just the 3rd hottest year on record. According to Spencer, "2015 [is] the third warmest year globally (+0.27 deg C) in the satellite record (since 1979), behind 1998 (+0.48 deg C) and 2010 (+0.34 deg. C)".
      1This plot shows that there has been no “hiatus” at the surface level since 1997. Look at red line (5 year averages) Perhaps a slow down in rate of increase, but that will change when 2015 results are plotted (both red line and black line). 2Not sure what the Lower Troposphere satellite data will say but that refers to a higher attitude temp data and is not as indicative as the surface data for climate effects (but all DATA matters).

        1) And you base your opinion that there has been no hiatus since 1997 on skewed and manipulated NASA GISS data?? Will the alarmists ever learn that there's been no global warming at all in nearly 2 decades. I seriouosly doubt it. You can deny is as long as you wish, but it doesn't change the facts. Not one whit...

        2) Attempting to separate lower and upper troposphere temps from surface temps is meaningless in this discussion. You can argue that surface temps are what count when discussing GW/CC, but there's no way you can argue that 2015 was the hottest years on record. The satellite records cover all three levels. The most accurate and definitive measurements come from satelites, both at RSS and UAH. You're correct, all data is important. And based on the best measurements, which are satellite, 2015 does not break the record of being the hottest on record.


        CONCLUSION:

        Keith's claim that 2015 will become the hottest year on record is false. There is no truth to it. Here are two articles that clearly debunk the claim:

        Satellite Data Shows 2015 Wasn’t Even Close To Being The Hottest Year On Record

        MICHAEL BASTASCH

        Satellite temperature data measuring Earth’s lower atmosphere shows that 2015 only ranks as the third-warmest year on record, and not the warmest year as predicted by scientists relying on weather station data.

        Climate scientists with the University of Alabama, Huntsville reported Tuesday the temperature anomaly for December 2015 was 0.44 degrees Celsius above the 1981 to 2010 average, fueled by an El Nino warming event. UAH scientist Dr. Roy Spencer posted on his blog that this “makes 2015 the third warmest year globally (+0.27 deg C) in the satellite record (since 1979).”

        Spencer noted 1998 was still the warmest year on record, but added that since “2016 should be warmer than 2015 with the current El Nino, there is a good chance 2016 will end up as a record warm year…it all depends upon how quickly El Nino wanes later in the year.”

        Continue reading...

        Data shows 2015 was not hottest year ever--wasn't even close

        By Thomas Richard

        Since 1978, satellites have been measuring the Earth's temperature and have given us a snapshot of 2015's overall temperature: it's not a record breaker. Not even close. In fact, 2015 didn't even come close to breaking any all-time records, the Daily Caller reported yesterday. Culling data from weather satellites that have been orbiting the Earth since 1978, climate scientists at the University of Alabama/Huntsville (UAH) reported that 2015 has only been the third-warmest year since satellite tracking began.

        As for 2015, the temperature was .44 degrees Celsius above the 1981 to 2010 time-frame, it's above-average warmth owed in large part to a naturally occurring El Niño event occurring in the equatorial Pacific Ocean. The last time an El Niño of this magnitude occurred was in 1998, the warmest year in the satellite record. But this current El Niño still ranks third when compared to the ones that occurred since 1950, when recordkeeping began.

        Continue reading...



      User avatar
      David Flick
      Site Admin
       
      Posts: 8490
      Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 12:55 pm
      Location: Oklahoma City, OK

      Re: AGW/Climate Change Debate 2016

      Postby KeithE » Sun Jan 10, 2016 9:28 am

      For the umpteenth time David, you are talking about the satellite data which is the lower troposphere not the surface record (which will be the hottest year on record when GISS and NOAA finish analyzing the data for Dec around 20 Jan). The Microwave Sounders cannot get that low.

      On the graphic below one can see the weighted average of the altitudes that the TLT (temperature lower troposphere) represents. This is the nature of the satellite data.
      Image

      Spend some time playing with the time series plotter that the Remote Sensing System (RSS) team in Santa Rosa CA has put on the web: http://images.remss.com/msu/msu_time_series.html

      I particularly want you, David, to note 2 things:
      1) Your truncated plot that you have continually shown on BL has been started with the purpose of having the 1998 El Nino peak near the left part of that series (which serves to flatten the trend line). If you you take all on the DATA since 1979 (when these microwave sounders began measuring) you will see a trend of 0.123K/decade as show in the link above. GOT IT!

      2) Play with the pull down menu under “channel" on the link above, to see how the trend line slope changes with altitude. The trend lines slopes are lower as you go up in altitude in perfect agreement with the fact that with time we are trapping more heat near the surface of earth. You will discover that in the stratosphere the temperatures have been going down since at least these measurements have began. Now imagine that a satellite microwave sounder could sample all the way to the ground. The trend line slope would be greater at the ground surface (altitude near 0). And the ground surface temp measurements have shown a greater slope (0.17C/decade from 1979 - 2015 - same span as the satellite data). That is good agreement. GET IT!

      BTW, a K for Kelvin is the same as C for centigrade in terms of change in temperatures.

      David Flick wrote:Way to go, Keith! Just a link to the NASA GISS data source, one that contains data which is indecipherable by anyone except a computer. Do you actually think anyone here on BL.Com is impressed that you are able post a document containing 135 years of temperature sets that (without a computer) can possibly be easily deciphered. There's major problem with that.


      The problem is with you David. I’m sorry you cannot understand the GISS data at http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata_v3/GLB.Ts+dSST.txt. Page to the bottom for their easily understood explanation that any junior high level math student should be able to understand. And you could too if you had “eyes to see”. It’s your motivation not your math inabilities that prevent you. Truth is, it is your mind that has been poisoned to believe the data has been “fabricated” or “manipulated" even though when properly viewed against the altitude trends of the satellite DATA (that you and I trust) they are quite compatible (validating in a loose sense both data sets).

      Goodness I have to get ready for church.
      Informed by Data.
      Driven by the SPIRIT and JESUS’s Example.
      Promoting the Kingdom of GOD on Earth.
      User avatar
      KeithE
      Site Admin
       
      Posts: 9320
      Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 8:02 pm
      Location: Huntsville, AL

      Re: AGW/Climate Change Debate 2016

      Postby KeithE » Sun Jan 10, 2016 3:17 pm

      David Flick wrote:
      1Here is a plot of the J-D temps through 2014. 22015 will be literally off the chart (that is above 0.8C, probably above 0.84C if Dec comes in above “78” 3and it will with El Nino going on).

        1) Yes, and the the graph was created by NASA GISS, which is the same source from where stemp/tabledata_v3/GLB.Ts+dSST.txt]this data set was came. A quick glance of the url for the graph demonstrates this: --->[/color] http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs_v3/Fig.A2.gif . You've cited a graph and a data set from NASA GISS, both of which are based on manipulated data. There can be neither accuracy nor honesty correlated with such data or graphs.

        2) Sorry to brust your bubble, but 2015 will not be off the chart. That was confirmed just last week. (More on this point below.)


        3) I find it amusing that you continually talk of the current El Niño as if it were most dangerous or terrible ever. Actually, records show there have been warmer El Niños. For example, the last time an El Niño of this magnitude occurred was in 1998, the warmest year in the satellite record.[/color] But this current El Niño still ranks third when compared to the ones that occurred since 1950, when recordkeeping began.[/color] (Source: 2nd paragraph, this article)


      I see David picks a tactic right out of Rush Limbaugh playbook of completely exaggeration snippets of my words into outlandish claims that I never made.

      Take for example what I said in red above:
      it will with El Nino going on.
      David has turned that into what is said in green above :
      I find it amusing that you continually talk of the current El Niño as if it were most dangerous or terrible ever

      I never said the El Nino (whose effects on temperature and extreme weather has just begun in the last half of 2015}, has been the worse ever. That remains to be seen. Most experts (including NOAA in Oct 2015) expect it to continue into 2016. But it’s longevity could be as long/severe as 1998 or as mild as that in 2010. You can already see it rising in both in the GISS surface level data especially for Oct and Nov 2015 at http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata_v3/GLB.Ts+dSST.txt
      and with lower troposphere satellite data David loves to plot (but will increasingly find irritating) since May 2015.

      Image

      which is a deviously truncated version of:
      Image

      That rise in late 2015 will continue to create a “pulse” that could be as high and long as the one experienced in 1998 or as long as the one in 2010. We will see.

      Like I said, if one has to exaggerate quotes to satirize them, the joke is on the exaggerator.
      Likewise if one has to truncate their data, they are most likely lying.


      And btw there is one other point I want readers to understand (I know it is well outside anything David could comprehend). The rho squared (R^2, also known as the coefficient of determination) is quoted as 0.000 in the plot above, which means that the trend line drawn essentially has no chance of being the true trend line. Listen to https://www.khanacademy.org/math/probability/regression/regression-correlation/v/r-squared-or-coefficient-of-determination to learn about it. This means that very little of the true values are described by that zero slope line that the lying “skeptics” are using to dupe it's readers (e.g. David). No statistician would be caught dead saying the trend line will continue to be at a slope of 0 (David, that means “horizontal”) into the future. Contrast that to the trend fits of the Arctic Sea Ice volume which all have r^2 of over 0.90 (i.e. most of the variation is caught by the trend line - Gompertz fit at rho squared = .925 being the best).

      Image
      Informed by Data.
      Driven by the SPIRIT and JESUS’s Example.
      Promoting the Kingdom of GOD on Earth.
      User avatar
      KeithE
      Site Admin
       
      Posts: 9320
      Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 8:02 pm
      Location: Huntsville, AL

      Hottest Year Ever

      Postby KeithE » Wed Jan 20, 2016 8:01 pm

      Here are 3 announcements:
      2015 Officially Hottest Year on Record

      We Just Lived In The Hottest Year On Record

      2015 is warmest year on record, NOAA and NASA say.

      The reason for it being the hottest is both global warming and the strong El Nino. To get an idea of the rate of increase draw a line between the 1998 and 2015 ‘High' El Nino years; that is 0.152C/decade = .275F/decade =2.75F/century. This rate of increase is consistent with the rate of increase since about 1965 with some variations.

      Image

      For the record this air temperature data is from the set of thermometers placed around world both on land and on buoys at sea at near surface levels.

      Also for the record, the satellite data does not get down to the surface air temperatures but instead are a weighted average over the lower troposphere. It is has been increasing at 0.123C/decade which is not as quick as on the ground. 2015 is not the hottest year at these altitudes - it is the 3rd hottest year since 1979 according to Roy Spencer who also says:
      2016 should be warmer than 2015 with the current El Nino, there is a good chance 2016 will end up as a record warm year.

      Image
      More on the satellite data here and how these rates change with altitude.
      Informed by Data.
      Driven by the SPIRIT and JESUS’s Example.
      Promoting the Kingdom of GOD on Earth.
      User avatar
      KeithE
      Site Admin
       
      Posts: 9320
      Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 8:02 pm
      Location: Huntsville, AL

      Re: AGW/Climate Change Debate 2016

      Postby KeithE » Fri Jan 22, 2016 10:15 pm

      David said:
      In the previous post (immediately above this one), Keith has fallen for the propaganda perpetuated by the usual suspects (Joe Romm, Gavin Schmidt, Michael Mann, Katharine Hayhoe, NOAA, NASA, et.al.). Katharine Hahoe famously boasted, "It's getting to the point where breaking record is the norm. It's almost unusual when we're not breaking a record." [color=#800000](Source: 5th paragraph here) Professor Hahoe doesn't know what she's talking about. Her comment is false. There have been no record heat records broken at all over the the past 18 plus years. None at all. In spite of all the propaganda floating around about "warmest year evah," the fact of the matter is that 1998 was much hotter than 2015.


      As I explained above (1 post up) 2015 like 2014 were consecutively the hottest year ever according to the surface (that means on the ground) air temperature direct thermometer measurements performed by NASA’s GISS Laboratory. It is true that 2015 was the third hottest ever according to the Lower Troposphere data (altitude weighted over 0 km to 12 km) as measured by the MSU/AMSU satellite data. And as you say 1998 is the hottest ever at that altitude (on that I agree). Both plots are given above (1 post up). There is nothing inconsistent about these measurements and I believe them both. Lower altitudes have more trend as I explained here. Did you do that homework I asked you to do, David? I doubt it.

      Have not read all the articles you lifted from “skeptics” sources (I did note 3 articles are by the same person). I have more important things to do in my life right now (read Prayer Requests).
      Informed by Data.
      Driven by the SPIRIT and JESUS’s Example.
      Promoting the Kingdom of GOD on Earth.
      User avatar
      KeithE
      Site Admin
       
      Posts: 9320
      Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 8:02 pm
      Location: Huntsville, AL

      Re: AGW/Climate Change Debate 2016

      Postby KeithE » Fri Jan 22, 2016 10:22 pm

      David,

      I mistakenly deleted your post that started with “In a land far away” . Then it had the quote I attributed to you in the post above.

      Then it had the 4 “skeptical” articles. I have lost those and if you can please add them again (not that I will agree with them).

      That’s the trouble with being the moderator - I can inadvertently delete stuff by hitting the “edit” button when I meant to hit the “quote” button.
      Informed by Data.
      Driven by the SPIRIT and JESUS’s Example.
      Promoting the Kingdom of GOD on Earth.
      User avatar
      KeithE
      Site Admin
       
      Posts: 9320
      Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 8:02 pm
      Location: Huntsville, AL

      Re: AGW/Climate Change Debate 2016

      Postby David Flick » Sat Jan 23, 2016 5:30 am

      KeithE wrote:David,

      I mistakenly deleted your post that started with “In a land far away” . Then it had the quote I attributed to you in the post above.

        Are you sure you didn't intentionally delete my post because it so thoroughly debunked your post?.. :D

      Then it had the 4 “skeptical” articles. I have lost those and if you can please add them again (not that I will agree with them).

      That’s the trouble with being the moderator - I can inadvertently delete stuff by hitting the “edit” button when I meant to hit the “quote” button.

        I understand your dilemma. I've done that myself on a couple of occasions. It won't be a problem because I generally save all of my posts in formatted form on my word processor. I began doing that about 5 years ago when I lost some of my best stuff right out into oblivion. Fortunately, I saved this one. The problem is that I've been quite busy with other things over the past couple of weeks and can't devote a lot of time to responding. I have probably 200 replies to you saved in my "Keith" archived files. I'll get it back up the wee hours of Sunday Morning...
      User avatar
      David Flick
      Site Admin
       
      Posts: 8490
      Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 12:55 pm
      Location: Oklahoma City, OK

      Re: AGW/Climate Change Debate 2016

      Postby Haruo » Sun Jan 24, 2016 5:31 pm

      David Flick wrote:I'll get it back up the wee hours of Sunday Morning...[/list]

      Eagerly waiting in the wee hours of Sunday Afternoon...
      Haruo (呂須•春男) = ᎭᎷᎣ = Leland Bryant Ross
      Repeal the language taxLearn and use Esperanto
      Fremont Baptist ChurchMy hymnblog
      User avatar
      Haruo
      Site Admin
       
      Posts: 13114
      Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2004 7:21 pm
      Location: Seattle

      Re: AGW/Climate Change Debate 2016

      Postby David Flick » Tue Jan 26, 2016 4:35 am

      David Flick wrote:I'll get it back up the wee hours of Sunday Morning...

        Haruo wrote:Eagerly waiting in the wee hours of Sunday Afternoon...

          Sorry about that, Haruo. Had to take a family member to the ER shortly after writing that post. Trip ended up with family member spending Sunday and Monday in hospital. Got home with family member at around 4pm Monday. All is OK with family member for now. Reposted post is below...

            -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Image

              In a Galaxy Far Far Away, 2015 Was The Hottest Ever
                (Planet Earth doesn't happen to be in that Galaxy far far away)
        In the previous post (this one), Keith has fallen for the propaganda perpetuated by the usual suspects (Joe Romm, Gavin Schmidt, Michael Mann, Katharine Hayhoe, NOAA, NASA, et.al.). Katharine Hahoe famously boasted, "It's getting to the point where breaking record is the norm. It's almost unusual when we're not breaking a record." (Source: 5th paragraph here) Professor Hahoe doesn't know what she's talking about. Her comment is false. There have been no record heat records broken at all over the the past 18 plus years. None at all. In spite of all the propaganda floating around about "warmest year evah," the fact of the matter is that 1998 was much hotter than 2015.


        Keith's begins his post (announcements) with three typical warmist propaganda links. Below are four links which both debunk the propaganda and give the honest facts of the matter. I'll not comment on the articles, which speak for themselves. Rather, I'll
        highlight a few of the paragraphs.

      Not so hot

      January 21, 2016 | By Craig Rucker

      The global warming campaign depends on computer models that project a warmer world than measurements record.

      What’s a warmist to do?

      Propagandize of course!

      Gavin Schmidt took over as Director of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies in 2014 after serving as James Hansen’s deputy. They are arch-warmists both.

      This week Schmidt is up to some old tricks and new. He proclaimed 2015 the “hottest year ever” and the media ate it up.

      This is a ruse designed to distract from the fact that global temperature is cooler than the models projected. They accomplished this by ignoring satellite data (the best we have) and adjusting their own terrestrial data to warm it up.

      Look for Schmidt to try and use the current naturally occurring El Niño as evidence of accelerated global warming and then to ignore the cooling from the La Niña that will follow.

      They also fiddle with the baseline to bring in years from last century that were unusually cold to exaggerate warming.

      Bias at GISS has gotten so bad that a few years back it prompted a large group of astronauts and space program veterans to sign a sternly-worded letter to NASA in protest.

      Continue reading...

      Data shows 2015 was not hottest year ever--wasn't even close

      By Thomas Richard | January 7, 2016

      Since 1978, satellites have been measuring the Earth's temperature and have given us a snapshot of 2015's overall temperature: it's not a record breaker. Not even close. In fact, 2015 didn't even come close to breaking any all-time records, the Daily Caller reported yesterday. Culling data from weather satellites that have been orbiting the Earth since 1978, climate scientists at the University of Alabama/Huntsville (UAH) reported that 2015 has only been the third-warmest year since satellite tracking began.

      As for 2015, the temperature was .44 degrees Celsius above the 1981 to 2010 time-frame, it's above-average warmth owed in large part to a naturally occurring El Niño event occurring in the equatorial Pacific Ocean. The last time an El Niño of this magnitude occurred was in 1998, the warmest year in the satellite record. But this current El Niño still ranks third when compared to the ones that occurred since 1950, when recordkeeping began.

      Even the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has written that judging an El Niño on a single day or week of sea surface temperatures and declaring it the worst ever is premature and not how El Niños are ranked. As NOAA points out, you have to look at changes that happen over seasonal timescales, and not just daily, weekly, and even monthly, readings.

      The Mail Online is also reporting today that 2015 was not the hottest year on record and that satellite data shows temperatures were lower than previously thought. In fact, both 1998 and 2010 were warmer than 2015, and 2015 had an average global temperature of .27 degrees Celsius above the global average. This amount is so small as to be statistically insignificant.

      Even now, NOAA is prematurely calling 2015 the hottest year on record even though the satellite record says something completely different. NOAA is basing their declarations on land- and sea-based temperature readings, which show 2015 was 0.97 degrees Celsius (1.75 degrees Fahrenheit) above "normal." But the satellite readings, which measure the atmosphere from five miles up 24 / 7 and are unaffected by 'tampering,' show only 0.27 degrees Celsius.

      According to NOAA, "The combined average temperature over global land and ocean surfaces for November 2015 was the highest for November in the 136-year period of record, at 0.97°C (1.75°F) above the 20th century average of 12.9°C (55.2°F), breaking the previous record of 2013 by 0.15°C (0.27°F)." Dr. Roy Spencer, a meteorologist at UAH, writes on his site that the most recent satellite data show that the temperature readings are consistent with an El Niño event.

      As previously reported, measuring the temperature on all continents to state unequivocally global warming is occurring is rife with error. The most complete temperature datasets for land and sea come from the United States, and even those readings have been challenged by leading scientists for being improperly collected, not collected at all, or situated in urban heat islands. Prior to satellites, we simply didn't have temperature measuring stations strewn about Africa, South America, China, and other continents like we've had in the U.S. for the past 200 years.

      Many weather stations are also subject to man-made manipulation, re-calibration, missing data, while consistently measuring higher temperatures than their surrounding rural areas. Measuring sea surface temperatures (SST) are also subject to the same issues.

      So it came as a surprise when NOAA rewrote the 200-plus-year historical temperature dataset to make the last twenty years appear warmer than the past. NASA followed suit and incorporated NOAA's data, thereby corrupting its own readings and eliminating the already acknowledged global warming hiatus. Both agencies are headed up by Obama appointees who appear determined to shore up his climate legacy.

      Continue reading...

      How NOAA rewrote climate data to hide global warming pause

      By Thomas Richard | June 5, 2015

      The number of excuses for the global warming pause or hiatus had grown to more than 66 when the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) added yet another one to the list in a just-published study in Science. In their argument that came out yesterday, NOAA said that long-existing instrument bases have masked rising sea surface temperatures. Once they "readjusted" the data, the warming hiatus disappeared. By cooling the past, they were able to make the most recent years even warmer.

      This assessment has drawn heavy criticism from both sides of the bitter climate debate, but one thing no one disputes: NOAA may have overstepped its authority in rewriting climate history and relying on faulty data sets. By making the early 1900s colder, and using only land-based temperature stations and less-reliable ocean temperatures, NOAA can now readjust the past to chart a new future.

      This new study also comes at a time when President Obama has shifted his focus to climate change, not to mention the EPA's proposed plans to completely revamp the country's power plant system through new regulations.

      One thing is clear: NOAA didn't rely on satellite temperatures, which clearly shows a global warming pause for the past 19 years. or the much more reliable ARGO buoys for ocean temperatures. According to The Daily Caller, "new satellite-derived temperature measurements show there’s been no global warming for 18 years and six months." Satellite data is preferable because it measures the first two miles of the lower atmosphere, and is accurate to within .001 degrees Celsius.

      Even the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) acknowledged two years ago that the rise in Earth's mean surface temperatures had begun to slow since 1998, and since then everything from volcanic activity to solar output to the oceans absorbing the extra heat have been put forward to explain the pause. Others believe the missing heat is hiding in the Deep Oceans, far from any sort of sensors or temperature gauges. NOAA is one of four independent organizations that gather and analyze global temperatures, and the three other groups have all detected a slowdown in the rate of global warming, which is why the IPCC mentioned the "hiatus" in the first place.

      The study, led by Thomas Karl, of NOAA's Climatic Data Center, said once the data was 'adjusted' and the biases accounted for, "this hiatus or slowdown simply vanishes." Karl et al insists that global average surface temperature has climbed 0.2 degrees Fahrenheit each decade since 1950, without interruption, due to the heat-trapping effects of carbon dioxide emissions

      Continue reading...


      Activists attack satellite temperature record in brazen new video

      By Thomas Richard | January 16, 2015

      Apparently NASA has something no other agency has: orbiting piles of junk beaming back temperature readings that are completely worthless. That's according to a new disinformation campaign being reported today by Breitbart News. Since 1978, satellites have been orbiting the Earth and measuring the planet's temperature from five miles up. But there's a problem: the last 18-plus years of that historical record show no statistical warming. So much so that even the IPCC acknowledged the pause in its last assessment report.

      For over two decades, we've been told the world is heating up, it's our fault, and the culprit is excessive carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions. Anyone who strays from that narrative is called 'anti-science.' This global warming "pause" has been such a sticking point, there are now close to 70 excuses to explain it away. Even President Obama has made global warming an enormous part of his second term; you only have to listen to his final State of the Union address to check the veracity of his commitment.

      Now an environmental organization has cobbled together a new video telling its viewers to pay no attention to the man behind the curtain, even as Toto pulls it back, revealing the truth. The video's creators have even assembled all the usual climate 'experts' to state unequivocally the satellite temperature record is 'distorted.' Have you ever noticed that in a field as large (and growing) as climate science, the mainstream media (MSM) always goes to the same well for juicy end-of-times the-rapture-is-coming quotes?

      This video is no different as it includes the usual array of alarmists: "Michael “Hockey Stick” Mann, Kevin “Travesty” Trenberth and Ben Santer." If there names sound familiar, it's because they were all put on full display in the 2009 ClimateGate emails. You may remember Michael Mann as the climate scientist who said in legal court documents (page 2, paragraph 2) that he had been "awarded the Nobel Peace Prize." He wasn't.

      In the video, Mann, speaking with all the gravitas as one of Hillary's pantsuits, says: "What's ironic is that it's really those satellite datasets that critics like John Christy hold up and Ted Cruz was emphasizing in that senate hearing a week ago…it is those datasets that are subject to the most adjustments that have historically been found to have been biased actually in the direction of showing too little warming." Christy has testified before congress and stated that global warming has slowed, and is not rising at the cataclysmic rate as predicted by climate models.

      John Christy, who has a doctorate in atmospheric sciences at the University of Alabama/Huntsville, is part of a team that collects the satellite data and compiles it for NASA and other organizations. The satellite record is so accurate, that 25 years ago NASA said the "satellite analysis of the upper atmosphere is more accurate, and should be adopted as the standard way to monitor temperature change." Oops.

      But that was then and this is now, and if the data doesn't fit your narrative, you create a millennial-style video that looks very smart and full of 'experts' who carefully explain why you can't trust those orbiting thingamajigs or the scientists who distribute the datasets. The video says the satellite records "have been subject to dishonest adjustments and that the satellites have given a misleading impression of global temperature because of the way their orbital position changes over time."

      Continue reading...
      User avatar
      David Flick
      Site Admin
       
      Posts: 8490
      Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 12:55 pm
      Location: Oklahoma City, OK

      Re: AGW/Climate Change Debate 2016

      Postby David Flick » Tue Jan 26, 2016 6:14 am

      David wrote:In the previous post (this one), Keith has fallen for the propaganda perpetuated by the usual suspects (Joe Romm, Gavin Schmidt, Michael Mann, Katharine Hayhoe, NOAA, NASA, et.al.). Katharine Hahoe famously boasted, "It's getting to the point where breaking record is the norm. It's almost unusual when we're not breaking a record." (Source: 5th paragraph here) Professor Hahoe doesn't know what she's talking about. Her comment is false. There have been no record heat records broken at all over the the past 18 plus years. None at all. In spite of all the propaganda floating around about "warmest year evah," the fact of the matter is that 1998 was much hotter than 2015.
        KeithE wrote:1As I explained above (1 post up) 2015 like 2014 were consecutively the hottest year ever according to the surface 2(that means on the ground) air temperature direct thermometer measurements performed by NASA’s GISS Laboratory. It is true that 2015 was the third hottest ever according to the Lower Troposphere data (altitude weighted over 0 km to 12 km) as measured by the MSU/AMSU satellite data. And as you say 1998 is the hottest ever at that altitude (on that I agree). Both plots are given above (1 post up). 3There is nothing inconsistent about these measurements and I believe them both. Lower altitudes have more trend as I explained here. 4Did you do that homework I asked you to do, David? I doubt it.

          1) And you think that surface temperatures based on bogus data from NASA GISS trumps satellite data?? Not only are you wrong, your data source is wrong. See #2

          2) And you trust the most widely known warmist manipulated data set (essentially bogus) to ever come down the pike?? Go back up and reread the four articles I linked to in the post above. Then examine the following articles which confirms the NASA manipulated data. Check them out here, here, here,
          here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, and finally here.

          3) Something's wildly wrong with your ability to measure consistency. The satellite data and the manipulated surface temperatures can't possibly be "consistent" if they don't agree.

          4) Thanks, but no thanks. I don't take "homework" from you. I do my own homework with the research I do.

        1Have not read all the articles you lifted from “skeptics” sources (I did note 3 articles are by the same person). 2I have more important things to do in my life right now (read Prayer Requests).

          1) You can now read the articles since I've reposted the post you "inadvertently" erased. About one person writing 3 articles, is there a rule in these debates that I can't link to three different articles from the same person in one post?? I think not. Goodness. you post links to the same graph by the same source on dozens of occasions.

          2) Maybe you should pray for wisdom to understand that catastrophic AGW and so-called man-caused climate change are nothing to worry about... :wink:

            -------------------------------------------------------------------

      User avatar
      David Flick
      Site Admin
       
      Posts: 8490
      Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 12:55 pm
      Location: Oklahoma City, OK

      Re: AGW/Climate Change Debate 2016

      Postby David Flick » Fri Nov 11, 2016 2:12 am

      User avatar
      David Flick
      Site Admin
       
      Posts: 8490
      Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 12:55 pm
      Location: Oklahoma City, OK

      Re: AGW/Climate Change Debate 2016

      Postby Dave Roberts » Fri Nov 11, 2016 9:19 am

      Funny that the US Navy is spending great amounts of money at the Norfolk Naval Station to deal with the rising levels of the Chesapeake Bay. Guess that is an inconvenient truth. Wonder if Trump will stop that expenditure to protect naval assets in a very vulnerable area which has seen coastal flooding twice this year.
      "God will never be less than He is and does not need to be more" (John Koessler)

      My blog: http://emporiadave.wordpress.com/
      User avatar
      Dave Roberts
      Site Admin
       
      Posts: 7671
      Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 1:01 pm
      Location: Southside, VA

      Re: AGW/Climate Change Debate 2016

      Postby KeithE » Sat Nov 12, 2016 12:56 pm



      David offer cartoons and Trumpian bluster. From David’s linked article:
      Skeptics look forward to the following Trump climate agenda:
      Donald Trump said on May 26, 2016:
      1) Trump pledges to rip up Paris climate agreement in energy speech
      2) Trump railed against “draconian climate rules”
      3) Trump said he would “cancel” the Paris climate agreement –
      4) and withdraw any funding for United Nations programs related to global warming.


      Image



      As for me, I’ll offer scientific DATA:

      Image
      It’s above 400 ppm now.

      Image
      Rapid recent rise in 2015 and 2016.

      Image
      Note the slight acceleration.

      Image

      A lot has changed since our last exchange in Jan 2016. I guess David listens to bluster.
      Informed by Data.
      Driven by the SPIRIT and JESUS’s Example.
      Promoting the Kingdom of GOD on Earth.
      User avatar
      KeithE
      Site Admin
       
      Posts: 9320
      Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 8:02 pm
      Location: Huntsville, AL

      Re: AGW/Climate Change Debate 2016

      Postby William Thornton » Sat Nov 12, 2016 3:22 pm

      Yeah. Then there's the DNC guy who said trumps election cut his lifespan by 40 years.
      My stray thoughts on SBC stuff may be found at my blog, SBC Plodder
      User avatar
      William Thornton
      Site Admin
       
      Posts: 12555
      Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 9:30 pm
      Location: Atlanta

      Re: AGW/Climate Change Debate 2016

      Postby Joseph Patrick » Sat Nov 12, 2016 3:53 pm

      From Joseph Patrick...aka Gerry Milligan
      For David and Sen. Inhoff (of Oklahoma, where else?), I offer Biblical proof of Global Warming...If, and only if one considers the Bible inerrant. To wit: Paul talks about landing on a sandy beach on the island of Malta. As one who has sailed completely around Malta, I can assure all of you that there is no sandy beach, anywhere. All there is on all coasts are rocks, about 3 to 5 feet above sea level. Only global warming could have melted the polar icecaps to such a degree that there are no longer sandy beaches.
      Joseph Patrick
       
      Posts: 665
      Joined: Sat Sep 25, 2004 12:53 am
      Location: Portland, OR

      Re: AGW/Climate Change Debate 2016

      Postby David Flick » Sun Nov 13, 2016 4:15 am

      KeithE wrote:As for me, I’ll offer scientific DATA:
        Keith claims to offer "scientific DATA" to refute David's "bluster," citing the four colorful charts (below). Keith's makes a fatal assumption, i.e. that the four charts are "scientific" evidence of AGW/Catastrophic climate change. Fact of the matter is they are 100% AGW propaganda...

      Image
      Keith: It’s above 400 ppm now.

      Image
      Keith: Rapid recent rise in 2015 and 2016.


      Image
      Keith: Note the slight acceleration.

      Image
        There's nothing "scientific" about the colorful chart above. Yes, there's a lot of propaganda there, but nothing legitimately "scientific" can be gleaned from it...
            ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Keith: A lot has changed since our last exchange in Jan 2016. I guess David listens to bluster.
        No, nothing has changed over the past 10 months. It's still the same old samo. Global Warming/Climate Change Alarmism continues to preach the same propaganda. And Keith continues to be a proponent of the same...
      User avatar
      David Flick
      Site Admin
       
      Posts: 8490
      Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 12:55 pm
      Location: Oklahoma City, OK

      Re: AGW/Climate Change Debate 2016

      Postby KeithE » Sun Nov 13, 2016 8:23 am

      Besides your longstanding bluster, lack of scientific understanding, and denialist articles your cited above, you really should have noted that the second chart was global surface temperature (air temp at the surface) not sea level.

      Image

      In this case it is temperature anomalies (that is deviation from some base period average) with the base period being 1880-1920. I rather like that base period rather than the often cited 1951-1980 which was far from constant. The 1880-1920 base period is fairly constant and more closely represents a time before industrial effluents started affecting temperature by increasing the amount of earth’s re-radiation particularly in the large CO2 absorption band of 12-20 microns.

      BTW, that chart above ends your already untrue truncated satellite data temp ‘no temp rise in last eighteen years’ cherry picked story. Look again at very rapid rise since 2011. Truth is we have been on a rapid rise since 1972 - look at red line (6x as rapid as any temperature rate of increase associated with transitions out of ice ages).
      Informed by Data.
      Driven by the SPIRIT and JESUS’s Example.
      Promoting the Kingdom of GOD on Earth.
      User avatar
      KeithE
      Site Admin
       
      Posts: 9320
      Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 8:02 pm
      Location: Huntsville, AL

      Re: AGW/Climate Change Debate 2016

      Postby David Flick » Mon Nov 14, 2016 4:31 am

      User avatar
      David Flick
      Site Admin
       
      Posts: 8490
      Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2004 12:55 pm
      Location: Oklahoma City, OK

      Next

      Return to Politics and Public Policy Issues

      Who is online

      Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests

      cron