So the data that suggests AGW is considered complete, data that doesn't suggest AGW is incomplete.

Nice.

And dmac thinks this makes sense. Classic.

I just love it when people give current temperatures in November as proof that global warming doesn't exist.

(11-14-2013 12:40 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  I just love it when people give current temperatures in November as proof that global warming doesn't exist.

OK. Maybe you'll like this one about last summer.

http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2013/...r-of-2013/

We've had some unusually mild winters recently but picking on a few years of the last decade and saying that's a trend over the last million doesn't tickle any type of scientific curiosity in me.

(11-14-2013 12:40 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  I just love it when people give current temperatures in November as proof that global warming doesn't exist.

I just love it when people point to forged data as proof that global warming exist.

(11-14-2013 09:05 AM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  

(11-13-2013 08:17 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  Nothing screams desperate like trying to explain away undesirable data instead of looking at an alternative hypothesis

Sun cycles.

Doesn't the agenda

(11-14-2013 01:07 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  

(11-14-2013 12:40 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  I just love it when people give current temperatures in November as proof that global warming doesn't exist.

I just love it when people point to forged data as proof that global warming exist.

None of it is concrete undeniable proof. That's what you don't seem to understand about science.

(11-14-2013 12:40 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  I just love it when people give current temperatures in November as proof that global warming doesn't exist.

Will you accept that Louisiana never hardly gets below 35 until February? We've hit 26 or lower the past couple of days, and will continue into the weekend. Last year, we got below 35 twice the entire winter season.

(11-14-2013 01:30 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  

(11-14-2013 01:07 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  

(11-14-2013 12:40 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  I just love it when people give current temperatures in November as proof that global warming doesn't exist.

I just love it when people point to forged data as proof that global warming exist.

None of it is concrete undeniable proof. That's what you don't seem to understand about science.

You talking about someone not understanding science. Lol...

(11-14-2013 01:30 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  

(11-14-2013 01:07 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  

(11-14-2013 12:40 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  I just love it when people give current temperatures in November as proof that global warming doesn't exist.

I just love it when people point to forged data as proof that global warming exist.

None of it is concrete undeniable proof. That's what you don't seem to understand about science.

You're talking to the wrong people. It's the catastrophists who claim it's "undeniable."

So get it straight and address them w/ your sanctimony.

(11-14-2013 12:33 PM)DrTorch Wrote:  So the data that suggests AGW is considered complete, data that doesn't suggest AGW is incomplete.

Nice.

And dmac thinks this makes sense. Classic.

It's as if you wrote words just because you can. Where you drunk when you wrote the first sentence?

(11-14-2013 01:32 PM)LSU04_08 Wrote:  

(11-14-2013 01:30 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  

(11-14-2013 01:07 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  

(11-14-2013 12:40 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  I just love it when people give current temperatures in November as proof that global warming doesn't exist.

I just love it when people point to forged data as proof that global warming exist.

None of it is concrete undeniable proof. That's what you don't seem to understand about science.

You talking about someone not understanding science. Lol...

It's funny that you act like you have any idea how science is carried out.

Progressives hate Cuccinelli because he called out UVA for lying about global warming.

Republicans hate Cuccinelli because he called out UVA for lying about global warming.


http://www.theguardian.com/environment/c...g-position

Quote:In yesterday's Virginia governor's race, Terry McAuliffe's win over anti-science Republican Ken Cuccinelli is showing that being a climate-change denier is a losing political position. Certainly the election was about many issues, but climate change was the most striking difference between the two candidates . Virginia's voters clearly rejected Cuccinelli's attacks against climate scientists and his head-in-the-sand views.

Ken Cuccinelli has a history of not only discounting scientists but spending taxpayers' money to actively attack them. In 2010, he began a witch hunt and accused climate scientist Dr. Michael Mann of fraud

The sad thing is that these lunatics actually believe this.

In fairness, most folks understand the basics of how science works, well most college educated folks anyways, like those on here, even if they don't know the correct terminology.

(11-13-2013 08:11 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  

(11-13-2013 06:33 PM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote:  My inner cynic says this is a desperate attempt to find an excuse as to why the planet has not been getting warmer for the last decade or so. Even the MET acknowledges "the pause" as they call it. And it isn't like they have much of a choice ... even their own data states it.

Which part of the planet? You do realize that surface temperatures aren't the only thing that matters, right?

Funny then that all those charts being used to push CAGW use temperature...

(11-14-2013 01:47 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  In fairness, most folks understand the basics of how science works, well most college educated folks anyways, like those on here, even if they don't know the correct terminology.

I would argue that while most people are taught the steps of a scientific experiment, very few are taught anything about analyzing and interpreting data.

That's where the real disconnect is.

(11-14-2013 08:12 AM)AngryAphid Wrote:  Several years ago, one of the Atlanta network affiliate Meteorologist recorded
temperatures in areas 20-miles South of each of the 34 Southeastern U.S. NOAA
Weather Stations. He only recorded a few months of numbers, but it produced nearly
two dredges lower average temperature than what the NOAA station reported.

He suggested that the cause for the higher NOAA temperatures was based
on the location of their monitoring stations (near or at airports) and that air traffic
disturbs the atmosphere, and a disturbed atmosphere lets less heat escape.

That has been proposed and dismissed a lot by the left. Even stations not at airports may have been effected by sprawl (what was a corn field in 1950 is a parking lot now)

You cannot believe in one and not the other.

If there is no such thing as global warming , then there can be no such thing as global cooling.

You cannot believe in good unless you also accept evil.

It doesn't take scientific evidence to know that we somehow got out of the last ice age.

If that isn't global warming, then someone please explain it to me.

(11-14-2013 01:51 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(11-14-2013 08:12 AM)AngryAphid Wrote:  Several years ago, one of the Atlanta network affiliate Meteorologist recorded
temperatures in areas 20-miles South of each of the 34 Southeastern U.S. NOAA
Weather Stations. He only recorded a few months of numbers, but it produced nearly
two dredges lower average temperature than what the NOAA station reported.

He suggested that the cause for the higher NOAA temperatures was based
on the location of their monitoring stations (near or at airports) and that air traffic
disturbs the atmosphere, and a disturbed atmosphere lets less heat escape.

That has been proposed and dismissed a lot by the left. Even stations not at airports may have been effected by sprawl (what was a corn field in 1950 is a parking lot now)

Where were you guys when Anthony Watts teamed up with a group of climate scientists and discovered that it doesn't matter? The study is currently under peer review if I remember correctly.

(11-14-2013 01:52 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  You cannot believe in one and not the other.

If there is no such thing as global warming , then there can be no such thing as global cooling.

You do play the fool well.

Quote:If that isn't global warming, then someone please explain it to me.

You're not tall enough for this ride! You don't even know the discussion.