sunsettommy

To expand on the undeniable evidence of the unchanging long term warming trend since the 1880's: Keep Aiming Towards Your Big Toe This was a response to Serioussam from this LINK.Who was continually shooting himself in the foot with comments. He he...

It appears that you have forgotten that DR. Mann et al.stated that 1998 is the warmest year in last 1,000 years. 1998 Was Warmest Year Of Millenium, Climate Researchers Report It was already wrong in 1999.Because even GISS temperature charts were showing 1934 as warmer than 1998. Questions on the evolution of the GISS temperature product This is one reason why I KNOW the H.S. is full of crap.Even Hansen's own GISS Temp was showing 1934 as being warmer.

Nope,Yes,Yes,Negative responses is common.

Yes and you have yet to make a rational counter to my use of the 1998 year. It is common for AGW believers to use the Cherrypicking complaint.But not explain WHY the chosen years are improperly used. LOL

What is Physics? LOL

You are hopeless. In the link SHOWS the chart.That SHOWS the undeniable fact.That it is cooler NOW than in 1998. You came up with the typical "Cherrypicking" claim.It is so poor a counter when you got whacked by valid date from a prominent climatologist.Who is open with the data and posts them openly. You seem to have a very hard time understanding that even a ZERO trend since 1998,is a big blow to the AGW hypothesis. Do you even know what the 2001 and 2007 IPCC temperature modeling projections starting with year 2000.Predicted for the decade of 2001-2010? Do you even know? Try this link.It will be interesting what rationalization you will come up with: Predictions Of Global Mean Temperatures & IPCC Projections

You missed this: my emphasis

He has a PHYSICS degree.Same as James Hansen. Neither one has the educational background to be considered the best qualified to tell the world about the climate. No Meteorology degree.No Environmental Sciences degree.No Geology degree. Meanwhile there are many who are educated in climate science who are being sandbagged.Some have been fired.Some have been given the "peer review" run around.Some are subject to absurd lawsuits. Dr. Lindzen has recently spilled the beans about his experience.The man YOU think is a qualified climatologist: Lindzen on getting the “special treatment” for publishing papers Selected Quote: It is apparent that you have no idea what is going on.

No! The IPCC temperature projections stayed the same in the 2007 report.They are just as wrong. Here is the link to the temperature chart,as maintained by Dr. Spencer: UAH Temperature Update for May, 2011: +0.13 deg. C It is easily cooler NOW than it was in 1998. Here is the 1990 IPCC prediction: Comparing IPCC 1990 predictions with 2011 data They have always been far warmer in their predictions,than what actually transpires. This is but one of many.That shows the failure of the AGW hypothesis. Something else is causing the long term warming trend since the 1850's.

LOL. Then you will have to rule out James Hansen.Who was the main driver of the AGW hysteria from the mid 1980's.The man Al Gore and the clueless media loves to follow. Seriously,are you going to play this "qualifications" game? The current IPCC chairman has no climatology degree.Neither does Dr. Mann who posted the always unvalidated "Hockey Stick" paper. LOL

DR. Roy Spencer states: LINK emphasis mine There has been a slight cooling the last 10 years.Certainly NO warming going on. This means the IPCC was very wrong on their 2001 temperature modeling projections for the first decade.

He is a Geologist

LOL, how about dropping the CO2 is pollution claptrap.And concentrate on REAL environmental concerns instead?

Prove it.

??? AGW supporters IGNORES the La-Nina factor.So does most of the Media. That is why they feel free to make wild statements on floods,Tornadoes,Increasing snow packs.Blaming it on.... GLOBAL WARMING. Notice how they hardly say much about the widespread cold and snows of the last few winters.In North America.But they go wild about a hot month in Moscow last summer.They blather on and on about it. Do you know that the winter months in America temperature's have been plunging for the last 10 years? From the NOAA Do you even notice that it has been cooling for the last year?

You made a misleading post. They DO NOT accept it to a "degree".The AGW Hypothesis is demonstrably wrong and has been for a while.They specifically say the hypothesis is wrong.Their predictions and projections have utterly failed. The Tropical Hotspot. The rate of projected warming from 1988 - Hansen.From 2000 -The 2001 IPCC report. The evidence that significant positive feedbacks exist.They exist only in climate models. I have already given you peer reviewed" link to Dr. Spencer's NEGATIVE feedbacks existence.Based on Satellite data. What some of the skeptical scientists do agree on.Is the very small rate of warming from increasing CO2 levels in the atmosphere. The AGW hypothesis goes well beyond that.They state by climate models of course.That POSITIVE feedbacks would cause a run away warming trend.The more CO2 accumulates in the atmosphere.The more positive feedbacks there will be.That of course is WATER VAPOR. I notice that you have brought up Lindzen several times.Here is a link to the Wall Street Journal.His own article on what he thinks.In it he makes clear,he does not accept the AGW hypothesis: The Climate Science Isn't Settled Selected quote: What he described is NOT the AGW hypothesis.It is a climate forcing sensitivity statement.He describes it by stating "the presence of greenhouse substances inhibits cooling by thermal radiation and leads to some warming" He later in the article declares the Positive feedback as being "intuitively implausible". He also states: You make the common error many people make. Trying to make it appear that skeptical scientists accept the AGW hypothesis,to at least some degree.They do not. Have you considered the LOGARITHMIC math on CO2 effect? CHART The chart is based on Lindzen,Choi science paper,2009.

Deleted

Sigh, No they are not happening because of "global Warming".It has been a cooling world since last summer.We ARE in a La-Nina phase.That is one of the major factors on why we have increased Tornado outbreaks.Historically large Tornado outbreaks occur during cooling trends. The sea level rise has been slowing down.It has been slowing down the last few years. The oceans are in an over all cooling trend.It has been for about 9 years now. The atmosphere is much cooler than last year.It is continuing to cool down for at least a few more months. Here is what the NOAA chart say about F3-5 Tornado outbreak trends: CHART The next link shows the slowing sea level rise.Based on official satellite data (included in the link): Christie Adviser Update Envistat and Jason satellite data are shown in charts in the link.They both report a slowing rate of sea level increase. It is not hard to see the Media lies and distortions.But that means you have to be skeptical to see it.

LOLOLOLOL, I actually exchanged messages with this person.He had SENT me his Video presentation link.I watched it and wondered what kool aid he drinks. He ended up running away from my serious offer to discuss it in the open.That is because he discovered that I have a forum that would examine it critically.He was scared of what I can do to his presentation.So he ran off on me. That was over 3 years ago. I believe that since the 1850's.There has been a slow warming trend.I state this as a skeptic.And most skeptics agree with it. The problem YOU have,is that you fail to differentiate what skeptic thinks about on the topic "global warming".From the Anthropogenic Global Warming hypothesis. Skeptics accepts the 150+ year long warming trend. Skeptics does NOT accept the AGW hypothesis. That is the difference,so many of you AGW supporters fail to understand. That is why alarmists/warmists often appear foolish,in attacking skeptics. I call it ignorance.

LOL, He did admit at post # 29: my emphasis Just sparingly he says. I had stated: "You apparently have no idea what has been going on in the world of climate science." He also wrote this nonsense: He now contradicts the IPCC report.Where they show that each year nature emits about 97% of the yearly total.Mankind the other 3%.His isotopic arguments are not credible because Nature can also produce some of the same signature isotopes that man produces. Then he goes on attacking "right-wing ideological debaters".A typical ad homonym. The AGW "science" is mostly based on unverified climate models.The ones that have already been shown to be wrong.In just the first 10 years of temperature data.Note that James Hansen's 1988 3 scenarios modeling is way off the mark.Note that the 2001 IPCC report produced a PROJECTED temperature chart,starting for the year 2000 to 2050 and beyond.Based on a dozen modeling runs.They are way off too. It is simply not warming anywhere near the rate that have been predicted/projected.Not even close! Actually the people who are peddling the AGW scaremongering,are making a lot of money from it.Al Gore wealth greatly increased because of it.So has the Wind power companies,and Solar Companies and other low mass power production stupidities.They are very heavily subsidized just to keep them in business. The oceans are cooling down slightly. The atmosphere is cooling down slightly. The Arctic ice pack has doubled in thickness since 2008.Implies a GROWING mass trend.Antarctica ice cover are near record levels,based on data trends of the last 30+ years. North American winters and in parts of Europe and Asia.The last few years have been above normal snow cover and depth. Global Warming is not happening at this time.

Bla,bla,bla. The usual irrational attacks and then a layer of ad homonyms. You apparently have no idea what has been going on in the world of climate science.

It is obvious that you will refuse to consider the evidence I presented.And continue with your silly doom and gloom feelings about the climate.I consider that as fighting reality in favor for propaganda. The recent warming trend is not at all unusual or dangerous.That is a fact I have already presented.This is what you can not face. But the fact is that there has NEVER been any sustained GLOBAL warming trend,since at least 1979 anyway.It has been mostly a NORTHERN hemisphere warming.That "Hockey Stick" paper was based on NORTHERN HEMISPHERE temperature reconstructions.Only a science illiterate will still fall for such a bad science paper. Not only that.We have been sliding into a new ice age phase,for a few thousand years now.The big drop is coming fairly soon. There are far more serious environmental issues than "climate change" to deal with.When are you going to see that?

Still not going to discuss anything I see.

But you have not been discussing anything in particular.Just post vague opinions and not support them. I tried to support my statements with data.What have you done? Why not tell us why you have a disputatious attitude with my post #147 HERE

I agree with your sentiments jbg. But to watch a royal wedding is NOT worth my time away from working with my climate skeptic forum and help run two other websites.