The Global Warming Plateau

[Shady]

I think it's cute how you try to protect the warmies and alarmists from "memes", and the affection for yet another American icon in Mr. Al Gore. Mentioning Google is just icing on this American cake !

"The science is settled"...."The debate is over" - V.P. Al Gore

Yep. He's said it numerous times, as have other warmies in the past.

[waldo]

Yep. He's said it numerous times, as have other warmies in the past.

what? Have you now backed off your earlier blathering? I did everything but give you the actual link to Gore's U.S. Congressional testimony - produce the statement... cite and quote it - verbatim.

[bush_cheney2004]

you have absolutely nothing substantive or meaningful to add to any discussion. When you can't get out from under your own generated BS, you simply resort to trolling... typically, as you've now just done, throwing down some mind-numbing bluster about 'American this/American that'. You have no game - none! You perpetually dredge up useless, dated, trivial, crap - and you actually think you're contributing!!!

My contributions to this forum are not subject to your review or approval. Please use the ignore feature provided if you find my posts to be "trolling".

Some of us do not worship V.P. Al Gore the way that others do.

[waldo]

My contributions to this forum are not subject to your review or approval. Please use the ignore feature provided if you find my posts to be "trolling".

Some of us do not worship V.P. Al Gore the way that others do.

no thanks - your blusterbus won't go unchallenged. As for Gore, the guy who really has no significant play/relevance today..... you're the guy who just brought him back for another of your meaningless "contributions". Talk about your worshiping the guy! You need to get over him and move on - get with the times, hey? C'mon, pick up your game!

[bush_cheney2004]

no thanks - your blusterbus won't go unchallenged. As for Gore, the guy who really has no significant play/relevance today..... you're the guy who just brought him back for another of your meaningless "contributions". Talk about your worshiping the guy! You need to get over him and move on - get with the times, hey? C'mon, pick up your game!

Of course, it is very obvious why warmie alarmists wish to distance themselves from Mr. Gore these days. However, you will not be able to prevent my or other member points of view from being posted, and you most certainly cannot change Mr. Gore's "climate change" legacy and growing bank account balance. Nevertheless, America stands ready to continue providing the critical support needed in the way of climate change research, data collection, analysis, internet resources, search engines, etc., etc. despite being a "denier nation".

Fact is, you are following Mr. Gore's [inconvenient Truth] marching orders to always shout down "deniers" and "win the argument". Mr. Gore would be proud even in a losing effort. The "science is settled", and Mr. Gore values your continued support to ram this idea home in the face of fierce and well funded denier armies.

Edited July 7, 2013 by bush_cheney2004

[waldo]

more of your bluster-bus, trolling bluster-bus! There's no distancing from Gore; he simply has no real relevance today... only someone so hopelessly floundering for something to prattle on about, would even bother to bring him up. Of course, he's a natural for you! Talk about your hero-worship!

do you actually have anything meaningful to contribute to this thread?

[bush_cheney2004]

more of your bluster-bus, trolling bluster-bus! There's no distancing from Gore; he simply has no real relevance today... only someone so hopelessly floundering for something to prattle on about, would even bother to bring him up. Of course, he's a natural for you! Talk about your hero-worship!

do you actually have anything meaningful to contribute to this thread?

Other members and I have already demonstrated that the "global warming plateau" is far more than just laughable technical errors and blundering by the IPCC and their warmie worshippers, but also the colossal failure to maintain momentum and influence actual policy. You and your warmie ilk are now just punch lines to an old joke started by Al Gore, who laughs all the way to bank, just like Big Wind and solar energy firms.

[waldo]

Other members and I have already demonstrated that the "global warming plateau" is far more than just laughable technical errors and blundering by the IPCC and their warmie worshippers, but also the colossal failure to maintain momentum and influence actual policy. You and your warmie ilk are now just punch lines to an old joke started by Al Gore, who laughs all the way to bank, just like Big Wind and solar energy firms.

you've demonstrated nothing - there is no so-called plateau... you haven't shown it and you can't show it - it doesn't exist. You've shown no technical physical science based errors relative to IPCC reports, because none exist. Your sole related idiocy focuses on a couple of legitimate social science errors within the WG II report, errors that had no consequence, none whatsoever. Of course, you haven't the wherewithal to know what the actual errors were; so you resort to parroting old tired repeated BS... it's what you do, it's what you're about! And this crap you now spin is so dated it has no relevance... it was beaten on repeatedly, years ago in past MLW threads. Again, since you can't muster anything new, since you have nothing pertinent to contribute to this thread, you dredge up the long dated past.

you haven't the chops to actually put forward a legitimate argument... on anything. Instead, you revel in the mindless drivel that floats around the denialsphere... and you parrot away! You've never put forward a single interpretation of any study, finding, position, etc., in your own words. Something that you'd actually have to research... and understand! Instead, you throw down stooopid cut&paste nonsense that you can't even speak to - you're nothing more than a cut&paste wizard!

[bush_cheney2004]

you haven't the chops to actually put forward a legitimate argument... on anything. Instead, you revel in the mindless drivel that floats around the denialsphere... and you parrot away! You've never put forward a single interpretation of any study, finding, position, etc., in your own words. Something that you'd actually have to research... and understand! Instead, you throw down stooopid cut&paste nonsense that you can't even speak to - you're nothing more than a cut&paste wizard!

As an American taxpayer, I pay for the studies that you quote like a well trained parrot, using "denier nation" resources. I had hoped that a "pivot" to Europe would get your mind and obsession away from the U.S., but perhaps this is not to be. Like a moth to a flame, you seemingly cannot ignore or disengage from my "stooopid nonsense".

Attacking me and others because of failed IPCC projections and laughable working group errors only reveals desperation and frustration. It's not that big a deal, but devoted warmie alarmist zealots insist on continuing the charade, even as more and more people laugh at them in popular media and, more importantly, economic choices.

[bush_cheney2004]

This is perhaps the most important impact of the global warming plateau:

Climatologist Dr. Roger Pielke Sr. on global warming ‘plateau’: ‘The divergence of the real world observations from the multi-decadal climate predictions, both in terms of forecasting the magnitude of global warming and of changes in regional climate, is finally initiating a much overdue scientific debate on the level of our knowledge of the climate system’

Edited July 7, 2013 by bush_cheney2004

[waldo]

you don't know what you're talking about; you never have and you never will. You can't substantiate anything you say/claim; you never have and you never will. If you think you're being attacked (which you're not) you should read back your own comments. I expect we'll shortly see another of your plaintive 'playing the victim' whines. Reading your simpering comments over claimed cartoonarama censorship was gold, Jerry... real gold!

[bush_cheney2004]

you don't know what you're talking about; you never have and you never will. You can't substantiate anything you say/claim; you never have and you never will. If you think you're being attacked (which you're not) you should read back your own comments. I expect we'll shortly see another of your plaintive 'playing the victim' whines. Reading your simpering comments over claimed cartoonarama censorship was gold, Jerry... real gold!

Do you have anything to offer with regards to the topic of "global warming plateau" ? Or is it more important to carry on these attacks against me and other members in a futile effort to silence opposing views? Please review forum rules if you are confused about what is accepted and unaccepted behaviour. The issue of cartoons or any other posted media content is being discussed in another thread.

[waldo]

This is perhaps the most important impact of the global warming plateau:

Climatologist Dr. Roger Pielke Sr. on global warming ‘plateau’: ‘The divergence of the real world observations from the multi-decadal climate predictions, both in terms of forecasting the magnitude of global warming and of changes in regional climate, is finally initiating a much overdue scientific debate on the level of our knowledge of the climate system’

that Pielke clown has no credibility. Obviously you haven't a clue about his background. But why be so shy in linking to your source? None other than one of the biggest disinformation artists out there - Marano's Climate Depot! This is your guy, the guy you're parroting - this is Marc Marano.

[bush_cheney2004]

Now...back to the topic...from the New York Times:

Now, here is a crucial piece of background: It turns out we had an earlier plateau in global warming, from roughly the 1950s to the 1970s, and scientists do not fully understand that one either. A lot of evidence suggests that sunlight-blocking pollution from dirty factories may have played a role, as did natural variability in ocean circulation. The pollution was ultimately reduced by stronger clean-air laws in the West.

Edited July 7, 2013 by bush_cheney2004

[waldo]

Do you have anything to offer with regards to the topic of "global warming plateau" ? Or is it more important to carry on these attacks against me and other members in a futile effort to silence opposing views? Please review forum rules if you are confused about what is accepted and unaccepted behaviour. The issue of cartoons or any other posted media content is being discussed in another thread.

oh I've had much to say in the preceding pages of this thread... you simply choose to ignore it. Correction: you simply can't understand it. You're not being attacked - quit playing the victim.

[waldo]

Now...back to the topic...from the New York Times:

a journalist with no scientific credentials - well done!

[bush_cheney2004]

oh I've had much to say in the preceding pages of this thread... you simply choose to ignore it. Correction: you simply can't understand it. You're not being attacked - quit playing the victim.

Yes...you are so much smarter than me and other members...so much so, you wish to silence us. Funny part is that the very same snotty arrogance displayed by global warming god (V.P. Al Gore) probably cost him the election.

[waldo]

Yes...you are so much smarter than me and other members...so much so, you wish to silence us. Funny part is that the very same snotty arrogance displayed by global warming god (V.P. Al Gore) probably cost him the election.

silence you? Not at all - parrot away, matey!

[bush_cheney2004]

silence you? Not at all - parrot away, matey!

Don't need your permission or blessing....you are just another member same as the rest of us.

[bush_cheney2004]

Warmies are on the run, put on the defensive by the "global warming plateau". They were so absolutely sure of the flawed models that kinda matched history, but failed miserably at forecasting the future. This Spectator piece reports the new tone nicely from across the pond:

The failure of the Earth to warm since the start of the century has been a talking point for global warming sceptics for many years, but it is only in the past few months that the mainstream media have started to pay attention too. In recent weeks the Economist, Channel Four News, and even ultra-green writers like the Telegraph’s Geoffrey Lean have sat up and taken notice. And on top of the pause, a series of recent studies of how fast temperature will rise in response to carbon dioxide emissions has produced estimates that are decidedly un-scary.

[waldo]

Warmies are on the run, put on the defensive by the "global warming plateau". They were so absolutely sure of the flawed models that kinda matched history, but failed miserably at forecasting the future. This Spectator piece reports the new tone nicely from across the pond:

The failure of the Earth to warm since the start of the century has been a talking point for global warming sceptics for many years, but it is only in the past few months that the mainstream media have started to pay attention too. In recent weeks the Economist, Channel Four News, and even ultra-green writers like the Telegraph’s Geoffrey Lean have sat up and taken notice. And on top of the pause, a series of recent studies of how fast temperature will rise in response to carbon dioxide emissions has produced estimates that are decidedly un-scary.

again, there is no plateau. You've been shown that even with your myopic concentration on, and only on, global surface temperature (while ignoring the 90% of heat going into the ocean); there is no plateau.

but again, you haven't a clue what you're talking about. A few short posts back you edited your post and blindly dropped in, without saying a word, the following graphic... the same graphic presented in your now linked Economist article - this graphic, as follows (that you actually pulled from a denier site prior to your now link to the Economist article):

now, what you don't realize, since you're nothing more than a parrot, is that your latest graphic is simply a revamped version of the same thing you trotted out in this post - here (from the same guy, from the same UK University): Of course, this was within the period of the running gag where you hadn't a clue about model uncertainty versus confidence intervals... in any case, I responded to you, to that post, with a lengthy critique of your lack of understanding - here:

my first suggestion for you, one to save you further embarrassment, is to do a little read-up on CMIP3 vs. CMIP5... and just when the full embodiment of CMIP5 is anticipated/projected. Certainly, the newest of model compilations have 'kinks' being worked out (say in terms of forcings, particularly aerosol precursors); however, through the same sequence of aforementioned posts I cited, I also presented you the projections of the relatively robust/stable older CMIP3 models, as follows:

of course, none of this really means anything to you! You're simply copying and pasting... while not adding a single word of your own interpretation of the related meaning or relevance or why you're even blindly dropping images, links and quotes!

[Shady]

So now, according to waldo, The Telegraph, The New York Times, The Economist and NPR are all lying. That's quite the conspiracy you've got going there!!!

Edited July 7, 2013 by Shady

[Shady]

a journalist with no scientific credentials - well done!

Oh right. What are Algore's scientific credentials again?

[waldo]

So now, according to waldo, The Telegraph, The New York Times, The Economist and NPR are all lying. That's quite the conspiracy you've got going there!!!

no conspiracy Shady. Let's separate out your NPR reference as it only deals with your (apparent) obsession with Al Gore... no where in that article is there a direct quote/statement supporting your claim. The NPR reference speaks to Gore's 2007 testimony before the U.S. Senate. I gave you the specific details of that testimony (the date of the testimony, the particular committee it was given before, etc.)... I emphasized the testimony is public domain and easily available for you to cite/quote directly from. You refuse to stand-up and support your claim by directly quoting from that U.S. Congressional testimony. If you so feel the NPR reference is correct (the NPR reference that doesn't present a direct quote from Gore), simply cite/quote the exact statement from Gore's U.S. Congressional testimony. It's quite simple - quote it!

the other references all speak to the same thing already discussed previously. They concentrate entirely on, and only on, global surface temperature. You've been advised of the distinction between global surface temperature and ocean heat content... and the increased warming of respective ocean layers observed in recent years. You claim ignorance of the fact that >90% of all warming goes into the oceans. You claim this is something new, something never before spoken of - I showed where you were mistaken in that regard. You simply choose to ignore this - to ignore everything presented to you. You are one of those who believes that a reduced rate of warming (global surface temperature warming) actually implies cooling!!!

in any case, in the context of that isolated global surface temperature, you have been presented absolute confirmation (from the World Meteorological Organization) that there is no plateau... you simply choose to ignore this. I could put up another half-dozen references (easily) and you will simply ignore those. I challenge you to put up an actual reference, one with a direct scientific tie, one that shows categorically, and absolutely, support for your claim of a "plateau".

[waldo]

Oh right. What are Algore's scientific credentials again?

ah yes, more of your obsession with Al Gore. Do you think Gore put that movie together on his own? Do you now claim Gore had no scientific advisers? Will this be your latest unsubstantiated claim? Point in fact, regardless of it's now dated relevance, that movie was critiqued to no end (of course, it had to be) on it's scientific merits... and for what it's worth, there were very few outright errors. None of this is news Shady. Rather, this is old news Shady!