Climate Denial Crock of the Week - The Cold Snap Disproves Global Warming

[The Night Owl]

www.youtube.com/watch?v=yDTUuckNHgc

[bkg]

I'd ask you questions... Like WTF is YOUR point?  But you won't answer them, so I won't bother.

[SSG Snuggle Bunny]

Apart from our having a good laugh about the Gore Effect have you seen anyone here peddling that?

Last I looked at this forum it was chock full of AGW fraudy goodness.

[Texacon]

I'll give you a $1,000.00 if you can prove global warming (man made).  Not kidding.

KC

[Chris_]

Manbearpig is very real, and he most certainly exists. I'm serial. I'm super serial.

[youtube=425,350]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zfGmf8L3-z0[/youtube]

[jinxmchue]

Does the cold snap disprove global warming?  Well, considering this cold "snap" has lasted for, oh, the last few years, I'd have to say it does.

Of course, you've also got the global warming fanatics who take everything no matter how contradictory and say it proves global warming: cold snaps, heat waves, glaciers melting, glaciers growing, more hurricanes, less hurricanes, etc.  And if you don't agree, well, then that means you're just ignorant of science.

A synonym for such people is also "assholes."

[The Night Owl]

Does the cold snap disprove global warming?  Well, considering this cold "snap" has lasted for, oh, the last few years, I'd have to say it does.

RELEASE : 10-017
NASA Research Finds Last Decade was Warmest on Record, 2009 One of Warmest Years

NASA Research Finds Last Decade was Warmest on Record, 2009 One of Warmest Years   WASHINGTON -- A new analysis of global surface temperatures by NASA scientists finds the past year was tied for the second warmest since 1880. In the Southern Hemisphere, 2009 was the warmest year on record.

Although 2008 was the coolest year of the decade because of a strong La Nina that cooled the tropical Pacific Ocean, 2009 saw a return to a near-record global temperatures as the La Nina diminished, according to the new analysis by NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) in New York. The past year was a small fraction of a degree cooler than 2005, the warmest on record, putting 2009 in a virtual tie with a cluster of other years --1998, 2002, 2003, 2006, and 2007 -- for the second warmest on record.

"There's always interest in the annual temperature numbers and a given year's ranking, but the ranking often misses the point," said James Hansen, GISS director. "There's substantial year-to-year variability of global temperature caused by the tropical El Nino-La Nina cycle. When we average temperature over five or ten years to minimize that variability, we find global warming is continuing unabated."

January 2000 to December 2009 was the warmest decade on record. Looking back to 1880, when modern scientific instrumentation became available to monitor temperatures precisely, a clear warming trend is present, although there was a leveling off between the 1940s and 1970s.

...

http://www.nasa.gov/home/hqnews/2010/jan/HQ_10-017_Warmest_temps.html

[Texacon]

http://www.nasa.gov/home/hqnews/2010/jan/HQ_10-017_Warmest_temps.html

Oh?

The decade of 2000 to 2009 appears to be the warmest one in the modern record, the World Meteorological Organization reported in a new analysis on Tuesday. Does that mean that the past decade has been cooling? No—of course not. Comparison of the red line in Fig. 1 with pre-1998 decades shows that the past decade is warmer, but the blue line shows cooling during the past decade—although the decade is warmer than previous decades, the climate did cool during the decade.

http://climaterealists.com/index.php?id=4646

KC

[Texacon]

Hey, TNO ..... from your article;

Although 2008 was the coolest year of the decade because of a strong La Nina that cooled the tropical Pacific Ocean, 2009 saw a return to a near-record global temperatures as the La Nina diminished, according to the new analysis by NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) in New York. The past year was a small fraction of a degree cooler than 2005, the warmest on record, putting 2009 in a virtual tie with a cluster of other years --1998, 2002, 2003, 2006, and 2007 -- for the second warmest on record.

This just in;

Two months after “climategate” cast doubt on some of the science behind global warming, new questions are being raised about the reliability of a key temperature database, used by the United Nations and climate change scientists as proof of recent planetary warming.

Two American researchers allege that U.S. government scientists have skewed global temperature trends by ignoring readings from thousands of local weather stations around the world, particularly those in colder altitudes and more northerly latitudes, such as Canada.

SNIP

Mr. D’Aleo and Mr. Smith say NOAA and another U.S. agency, the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) have not only reduced the total number of Canadian weather stations in the database, but have “cherry picked” the ones that remain by choosing sites in relatively warmer places, including more southerly locations, or sites closer to airports, cities or the sea -- which has a warming effect on winter weather.

SNIP

http://www.vancouversun.com/technology/Scientists+using+selective+temperature+data+skeptics/2468634/story.html

thought you might be interested ....   

KC

[Oceander]

A cold snap, by itself, even if it becomes the new prevalent weather pattern in a given geographic locale, does not disprove global warming (howsoever caused) because global warming (howsoever caused) simply leads to there being more energy in the weather system (whole system - atmosphere, oceans, and land-masses - anything that affects the weather/climate), which may lead to more air movement, more violent storms, and thus to bringing larger masses of cold air down from the poles and over into the temperate areas more frequently than before.

That being said, due to the active, politically motivated fraud committed by the global warming religionists, we have unfortunately effectively lost the raw data we would need to actually determine whether or not global warming was occuring and if so, the extent to which humans might be contributing to it.  Thanks, left-wing eco-freaks.

[Texacon]

And for the record ... if you want to say these guys won't lie to push an agenda;

In addition to the allegations against NOAA and GISS, climate scientists are also dealing with the embarrassment this week of the false glacier-melt warning contained in the 2007 report of the UN Panel on Climate Change. That report said Himalayan glaciers are likely to disappear within three decades if current rates of melting continue.

This week, however, the panel admitted there is no scientific evidence to support such a claim.

The UN 'scientist' admitted it was done for political reasons.

WHY should I believe any of these assholes?  All they want to do is FORCE me to do stupid things like buy 'carbon credits'.  Yup, that's what I want to spend my money on.

Global Warming Alarmists should be jailed for creating a ponzi scheme or simple fraud.

KC

[SSG Snuggle Bunny]

He's throwing pebbles at avalanches.

[MrsSmith]

http://antigreen.blogspot.com/

The scientist behind the bogus claim in a Nobel Prize-winning UN report that Himalayan glaciers will have melted by 2035 last night admitted it was included purely to put political pressure on world leaders. Dr Murari Lal also said he was well aware the statement, in the 2007 report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), did not rest on peer-reviewed scientific research.

...


Call it the mystery of the missing thermometers. Two months after "climategate" cast doubt on some of the science behind global warming, new questions are being raised about the reliability of a key temperature database, used by the United Nations and climate change scientists as proof of recent planetary warming. Two American researchers allege that U.S. government scientists have skewed global temperature trends by ignoring readings from thousands of local weather stations around the world, particularly those in colder altitudes and more northerly latitudes, such as Canada.

...

THE United Nations climate science panel faces new controversy for wrongly linking global warming to an increase in the number and severity of natural disasters such as hurricanes and floods. It based the claims on an unpublished report that had not been subjected to routine scientific scrutiny - and ignored warnings from scientific advisers that the evidence supporting the link too weak. The report's own authors later withdrew the claim because they felt the evidence was not strong enough.



Very thorough site... 

[Texacon]

http://antigreen.blogspot.com/

The scientist behind the bogus claim in a Nobel Prize-winning UN report that Himalayan glaciers will have melted by 2035 last night admitted it was included purely to put political pressure on world leaders. Dr Murari Lal also said he was well aware the statement, in the 2007 report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), did not rest on peer-reviewed scientific research.

...


Call it the mystery of the missing thermometers. Two months after "climategate" cast doubt on some of the science behind global warming, new questions are being raised about the reliability of a key temperature database, used by the United Nations and climate change scientists as proof of recent planetary warming. Two American researchers allege that U.S. government scientists have skewed global temperature trends by ignoring readings from thousands of local weather stations around the world, particularly those in colder altitudes and more northerly latitudes, such as Canada.

...

THE United Nations climate science panel faces new controversy for wrongly linking global warming to an increase in the number and severity of natural disasters such as hurricanes and floods. It based the claims on an unpublished report that had not been subjected to routine scientific scrutiny - and ignored warnings from scientific advisers that the evidence supporting the link too weak. The report's own authors later withdrew the claim because they felt the evidence was not strong enough.



Very thorough site... 

Very good Mrs. Smith!!   

I don't think TNO will be back to this thread.  Owned is too light a word for what has gone on here.  There are idiots then there are global warming alarmists.  They're worse than Moonies.

KC

[SSG Snuggle Bunny]

Very good Mrs. Smith!!   

I don't think TNO will be back to this thread.  Owned is too light a word for what has gone on here.  There are idiots then there are global warming alarmists.  They're worse than Moonies.

KC

I already had an entire thread on this article.

Can't beat no bunny!

[MrsSmith]

I already had an entire thread on this article.

Can't beat no bunny!

The site in my post has multiple anti-warmer columns, with research and links.  It would be a good one to hang on to for reference.   

[The Night Owl]

Very good Mrs. Smith!!   

I don't think TNO will be back to this thread.  Owned is too light a word for what has gone on here.  There are idiots then there are global warming alarmists.  They're worse than Moonies.

KC

Exaggerations and errors aside, the glaciers are not fine.

Watch: http://asiasociety.org/onthinnerice

[Wineslob]

second warmest since 1880.

Care to link the data, worldwide, that gives the temps, with the source material?


More bullshit.

[Wineslob]

Exaggerations and errors aside, the glaciers are not fine.

Watch: http://asiasociety.org/onthinnerice

So, tell me, have glaciers never melted before? Ever?

[The Night Owl]

Care to link the data, worldwide, that gives the temps, with the source material?

http://tamino.wordpress.com/climate-data-links
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/data-sources

[The Night Owl]

So, tell me, have glaciers never melted before? Ever?

Yes. So what?

[Chris_]

http://tamino.wordpress.com/climate-data-links
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/data-sources

TNO....."realclimate" is no longer considered a credible source........since they were found to be complicit in the "climategate" affair.........please don't waste members time arguing points that are published on that site.....

Thank You.....

doc

[SSG Snuggle Bunny]

http://tamino.wordpress.com/climate-data-links
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/data-sources

As TVDOC noted realclimate.com is not a scientific research site but policy advocacy.

In short: they've lied.

And as the point of the article you seek to rebut centers on the fact that the Himilayan glacier melt was nothing more wild-assed speculation uttered in a phone conversation rather than a definitive research article perhaps the IPCC should have found some real research rather than "ignoring" what they knew to be speculation for "political" reasons.

[Texacon]

Exaggerations and errors aside, the glaciers are not fine.

Watch: http://asiasociety.org/onthinnerice

Do you believe that global warming is man made?  Me, I don't believe in global warming at all but if it were warming I don't think for a minute that man has any impact on it.

You are admitting to exaggerations and errors ... why do you suppose those who are pushing the global warming agenda do that?  Do you think it hurts or helps their cause?

IF the science is so strong why not just live with that?

What has convinced you that the globe is warming?  And does that source have any past history of these 'exaggerations and errors'?  If they do then why do you still believe?

I'm simply curious.  I've never actually met anyone who believed in man made global warming and I only know a few who believe in global warming at all.

KC

[SSG Snuggle Bunny]

Do you believe that global warming is man made?  Me, I don't believe in global warming at all but if it were warming I don't think for a minute that man has any impact on it.

You are admitting to exaggerations and errors ... why do you suppose those who are pushing the global warming agenda do that?  Do you think it hurts or helps their cause?

IF the science is so strong why not just live with that?

What has convinced you that the globe is warming?  And does that source have any past history of these 'exaggerations and errors'?  If they do then why do you still believe?

I'm simply curious.  I've never actually met anyone who believed in man made global warming and I only know a few who believe in global warming at all.

KC

He psychologically NEEDS man-made global warming.

It allows him to play David against the AGW Goliath (ditto christianity and the wars). It gives a sense of excitement and heroism to an otherwise tedious existence if you believe yourself fighting things bigger than you.

AGW isn't even PHYSICALLY POSSIBLE as it violates the laws of thermodynamics but does this give the AGW-types a sense of relief?

Nope, they just double-down on their denier-denialism. The debunking of imminent dread, death, doom and gloom actually fills them with sadness.

Liberals are weak-minded idiots.