Reply With Quote
Who cares about Idaho
The reason why there is so much talk about "concensus" and that the debate continues (dispite Al Gore's objections) is because the science behind AGW is so WEAK.
Who cares about Idaho
But the issue remains that the ice caps are melting, so we have to ask why. If it's a variance determined solely by astrophysical variables, then we should have seen this coming in a predictable way. But we didn't. So what is it? Where is the heat coming from?
Just show me the study that proves this melting is due to human-produced CO2 and I'll never post a thread on AGW again.
<crickets>
South Texas had its hottest summer on record in all of history. We had the worst drought over the past 2 years that has ever been recorded and you think its because of some San Antonio heat island effect?
This is so incredibly ing stupid. I know that some other people fall for your bull because you post a few pretty graphs or through out a few big words but I think its hilarious that anytime you come up against someone that actually knows about the science you're talking about they immediatly figure out just what a ing idiot you are.
Yes, the hottest summer in South Texas history was due to a an urban heat island.
Amazing.
And end this lovely conversation? Not a chance! But back to my question: where's the heat come from?
South Texas had its hottest summer on record in all of history. We had the worst drought over the past 2 years that has ever been recorded and you think its because of some San Antonio heat island effect?
This is so incredibly ing stupid. I know that some other people fall for your bull because you post a few pretty graphs or through out a few big words but I think its hilarious that anytime you come up against someone that actually knows about the science you're talking about they immediatly figure out just what a ing idiot you are.
Yes, the hottest summer in South Texas history was due to a an urban heat island.
Amazing.
And the northern parts of the US had one of their coolest summers in history. Sounds to me like an unusual weather pattern that was holding for much of the summer.
Notice I never tired either to climate change, Darrin. I know you had your canned response ready to go, but I merely pointed out how stupid the connection of an urban heat island effect to the entire regions abnormally hot summer was.
You saw the tee set up and decided to swing away and you never realized there was no ball there.
Fair enough.
I don't think our record heat had much to do with urban heat island effect, but I do think the effect is real and affects surface temperature measurements.
Here's a good site that has been monitoring USHCN sites. http://www.surfacestations.org/
Here's the sites they've surveyed. Yellow sites measurement error > 1C. Orange sites measurement error > 2C.
I really had thought the ed posting of cold snaps to somehow debunk overall global warming stopped a while back.
Guess we could start having pissing contests with links to record breaking heat waves or droughts again.
Way to elevate the conversation.
Of course they did; it was summer.
I find it quite telling about the level of critical thinking involved with posts like the OP where cold snaps are presented to imply criticism of a theory that says, in part, that AVERAGE global temperatures are rising.
It is a bit like looking at a statistic that the average of 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 is 2.5 and saying "OH MY GOD, LOOK, TWO OF THOSE NUMBERS ARE BELOW THE AVERAGE, HOW SILLY DO YOU HAVE TO BE TO BELEIVE THE "THEORY" THAT THE AVERAGE IS 2.5".
gmafb
Or, just look at the average temps since 1998.
AGW seems like a compelling theory -- if only the weather would cooperate.
Interesting how you guys never address the data collected by http://www.surfacestations.org
Why would one want to restrict a look at how CO2 affects the climatw to just the last 10 years?
Haven't we been buring coal/oil for longer than that?
Interesting how you guys never address the data collected before 1998.
Funny how you guys never have addressed data collected by these weather stations:
http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/asiapc...tml#cnnSTCText
Seriously, Darrin, you start to sound like the 9-11 conspiracy theorists sometimes when you simply cherry-pick data that supports your pet theory, and ignore things that don't fit into that.
A simple question for you:
How long does a predictive computer model have to be wrong (and by how much), before you lose faith in its predictions?
20 years?
30 years?
more?
At least he linked to actual data that time, as opposed to, y'know, a ing local news weather report...
At least I never compare RandomGuy to a 911 twoofer or a Holocaust denier. I understand why many people believe in catastrophic AGW. I used to be one of those people. This issue is not political to me at all. It's a simple matter of comparing what's has been predicted to what's been observed (measured).
Are you sure you have a statistically significant period of measurement to conclude one way or another?
Not plural, only one has decreased. The other increased.
In a sense, that's what I'm asking RG. At what point do you say the IPCC models are completely useless? Current trends do not agree with the model predictions. I know my OP of using a singular event is nonsensical, but it does irk the true believers and gets them discussing it.
You're looking at the model output completely incorrectly and thats why you think you can declare them incorrect.
That's clear as mud.
How should someone look at the model output? I used my eyes.
i'm still in shock that there would be cold weather in colorado and idaho.
Funny that you ducked answering my question about WHY you would only want to talk about the last 10 years.
The answer to that question, were you to answer it honestly:
"I only wanted to use the last 10 years' data, because that is the data that I think makes my case."
Cherry-picking. Just like the asshats at Truthout.org.
"OMG, PEOPLE HEARD EXPLOSIONS. BOMBS MAKE EXPLOSIONS, IT MUST HAVE BEEN BOMBS!!!"
"OMG, HERE IS DATA THAT SHOWS IT BEING COLDER THAN AVERAGE. SINCE IT WAS COLDER IN THIS TEN YEAR PERIOD, IT MUST DISPROVE GLOBAL WARMING."
It is patently intellectually dishonest to simply present data from an isolated ten year period when you are attempting to debunk a wider trend.
Making a case is one thing, making it dishonestly, or illogically, is another.
Someone goes into much more depth here:
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php...warming-pause/
Are you making a case, or are you deliberately trying to mislead?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
