Climate Change skeptics? [ot]

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
Messages 14041 - 14060 of total 28524 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
The Chief

climber
From the Land of the Mongols
Oct 12, 2013 - 10:00pm PT
That lower arrow needs to come back to 2000 where that plateau to the left is and right above the year 2000 there MONO. Not be pos'd around 2003.



You are now back peddling big time MONO.

"Flatlining" = NO WARMING dude.







monolith

climber
SF bay area
Oct 12, 2013 - 10:03pm PT
Chief, get some glasses, and draw straight lines.

Your line is slanted from 2000, idiot.
rick sumner

Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
Oct 12, 2013 - 10:05pm PT
I'm away for a few days; i glance at this threads new content to see that the resident chief scientist, our own Dr. Ed Hartouni, has been lording around impugning the realists (that's the skeptics for the uninformed) motives in denying anthropogenic climate catastrophe and attempting to belittle us for our lack of scientific training to his level. Well Dr. Ed, may i remind you that if this little debate was being judged by an unbiased and impartial panel ( no thats not DMT) you would already have lost. First, several thousands posts ago when you admitted " the anthropogenic signal is rather feeble compared to natural variability". Second, several hundred posts ago when you fully decloseted your political ideology and in effect said; The era of the individual is over with the limitations of sustainability imposed by our overpopulation. You seem to be of the ideology that human freedom, mobility,choice, even thought should be surrendered to the collective. Now anyone, with any degree of rational thought process, would look at that kind of statement and conclude that you can't seperate the bias of your ideology from the science you practice. Perhaps you have forgotten this, perhaps you don't realize that all incoming observations for you are clouded by your ideological filter, but surely you realize that all analysis and dissemination of this science is heavily tinged by your ideals. You've lost twice professor, i urge you to take off the shet covered glasses and try to get the clear picture of the real world before you are a three time loser.
The Chief

climber
From the Land of the Mongols
Oct 12, 2013 - 10:16pm PT
Hey MONO, been taking lessons from the dead have you....

MONO:
... look at all the flatlining while Argo ramps up.


NIIIIIIIIIICE!








GOOD POST RICK S!!!! PERFECT and SPOT ON.

Well Dr. Ed, may i remind you that if this little debate was being judged by an unbiased and impartial panel ( no thats not DMT) you would already have lost. First, several thousands posts ago when you admitted " the anthropogenic signal is rather feeble compared to natural variability". Second, several hundred posts ago when you fully decloseted your political ideology and in effect said; The era of the individual is over with the limitations of sustainability imposed by our overpopulation. You seem to be of the ideology that human freedom, mobility,choice, even thought should be surrendered to the collective. Now anyone, with any degree of rational thought process, would look at that kind of statement and conclude that you can't seperate the bias of your ideology from the science you practice. Perhaps you have forgotten this, perhaps you don't realize that all incoming observations for you are clouded by your ideological filter, but surely you realize that all analysis and dissemination of this science is heavily tinged by your ideals. You've lost twice professor, i urge you to take off the shet covered glasses and try to get the clear picture of the real world before you are a three time loser.
mechrist

Gym climber
South of Heaven
Oct 12, 2013 - 10:19pm PT
HOLY SH#T, that is the best you can do?



That is one of the saddest efforts I have ever seen... and I once taught a 3rd grade science class. Rick Dumber's post above is also pretty damn sad... but at least it is 5th grade level stupidity.
The Chief

climber
From the Land of the Mongols
Oct 12, 2013 - 10:24pm PT
OK...MONO




Where is your supposed "flatlining while Argo ramps up" claim in your graph above????

Cus the graph below is from the same source you constantly use above!

http://skepticalscience.com/




One or the other.


Make up your fking mind MONO!!!!

monolith

climber
SF bay area
Oct 12, 2013 - 10:29pm PT
Dumbass, that chart was upper ocean only. And you have to average all those lines.

My chart is upper, lower and atmosphere + land and ice.
Ron Anderson

Trad climber
Relic MilkEye and grandpoobah of HBRKRNH
Oct 12, 2013 - 10:30pm PT
I believe Wiley Rhino has sucked the "warming" from our plant and now exhales it here. Between his mouth and Dirtbags open orifices, there are plenty of black holes in which this heat/energy can hide..
rick sumner

Trad climber
reno, nevada/ wasilla alaska
Oct 12, 2013 - 10:32pm PT
What all of you catastrophists, scientists and interested laymen alike, have got to begin to admit is that your holy grail, the models, are grossly incorrect in their testable predictives. Yes, the science is solid as far as the mythical molecules abilities in being able to absorb earth upwelling IR, but the degree of permanent sequestration of rising temps is not keeping pace with the increase of atmospheric CO2 content. There are things happening on this Earth that the scientists have ignored, undervalued, or just plain don't know. Collectively they are the negative feedbacks that are preventing the system from becoming uninhabitable to it's biological systems that are themselves a controlling mechanism of climate change. This latest IPCC meeting was met with a collective yawn from the media and general public. Those that are following it see the beginning of the end for the criers of climate doom. Scientists the world over are looking into new avenues of natural climate change mechanisms and publishing results in ever increasing numbers. CAGW's gig is up!
mechrist

Gym climber
South of Heaven
Oct 12, 2013 - 10:32pm PT
Well, it is official... chaff doesn't know how to read graphs. Anyone surprised? Didn't think so.

Rick, with all do respect, please shut the fuk up you ignorant fool.
The Chief

climber
From the Land of the Mongols
Oct 12, 2013 - 10:33pm PT
.... that chart was upper ocean only.

My chart is upper, lower and atmosphere + land.


WHERE is the "flatlining" in the Upper Depths (light blue) in the chart below MONO??

The Chief

climber
From the Land of the Mongols
Oct 12, 2013 - 10:39pm PT
you have to tilt the upper line cuz it's relative to the lower rising lines.

Tilt what line???

The heat content is as the graph states for the Upper Depths 0-700 meters.

No "flatlining there.





mechrist

Gym climber
South of Heaven
Oct 12, 2013 - 10:41pm PT
mono: you have to tilt the upper line cuz...

chuff: Tilt what line???

idiot
monolith

climber
SF bay area
Oct 12, 2013 - 10:43pm PT
I see you've conceded the 2000 start point. Good job.

The charts don't plot the same thing, and when you average the 'flatlining' sections of your chart, you still get a rise, it's just not as steep as the previous section.

Bruce Kay

Gym climber
BC
Oct 12, 2013 - 10:53pm PT
Mythical molecules? what the hell do you know about any kind of molecules Rick? For christ sake I just handed you the guts of your big opportunity to expose the nefarious scheming of the international scientism plot to rule the wprld and you're still moaning about mythical molecules? My god man leave the science alone and get down to what its all about. I suggest you get a list of the suspect open access publishers that John Bohannen exposed with his sting operation and start seeing what climate papers they have published..... it would be interesting to see which of the 97% were involved in this obvious fraud perpetrated on the unsuspecting public.... and then you could see where your boys and girls publish, not doubting of course who is more legit eh?


http://scicomm.scimagdev.org/

http://www.sciencemag.org/content/342/6154/60.full



Right up your alley. Think of all the reading you can do....

The Chief

climber
From the Land of the Mongols
Oct 12, 2013 - 11:17pm PT
The charts don't plot the same thing, and you need to average the 'flatlining' sections of your chart

Bullshet!

They are both indicating the Upper Depths 0-700 Meters OCEAN HEAT CONTENT and of all things, they are from YOUR source, http://skepticalscience.com

One from 2012(the one you continuously post to show the Ocean Warming)
VV NO INDICATED "flatlining"VV

http://skepticalscience.com/nuccitelli-et-al-2012.html

The other from 2010(Indicating the "flatlining")

http://www.skepticalscience.com/cooling-oceans.htm


So which one is it MONO.

Which one "accurately" depicts UPPER OCEAN HEAT CONTENT 0-700 meters?

Neither correlates to the other in the temp parameters for the same time frames either.

The top starts around 13(10 22J) and ends around 20.

The bottom starts around 2(10 22J) and flatlines around 10.

WTF???






RICK's recent post most definitely applies to all of you. ALL of you WARMISTS here on this thread!

Now anyone, with any degree of rational thought process, would look at that kind of statement and conclude that you can't seperate the bias of your ideology from the science you practice. Perhaps you have forgotten this, perhaps you don't realize that all incoming observations for you are clouded by your ideological filter, but surely you realize that all analysis and dissemination of this science is heavily tinged by your ideals. You've lost twice professor, i urge you to take off the shet covered glasses and try to get the clear picture of the real world before you are a three time loser.
monolith

climber
SF bay area
Oct 12, 2013 - 11:54pm PT
LOL Chief, if you average the 'flatlining' sections, you will get a rising line, just like my chart.

The sections are on top of each other and start near each other at the circle, idiot.

Each one is made by a different team, using different methods. That's why you need to average them.
The Chief

climber
From the Land of the Mongols
Oct 13, 2013 - 12:10am PT
Each one is made by a different team, using different methods. That's why you need to average them.

Do so MONO and you get NOTHING close to the graph you keep posting.

And....

You get NO supposed flatling during the "ramp up of ARGO"


So both of your claims are completely full of bullshet. Just like all your other posting here.

Pure BULLSHET!




monolith

climber
SF bay area
Oct 13, 2013 - 12:13am PT
Hilarious watching you comparing charts with different start dates, one averaged and one not.

Hey, look at 2003-2004 on both charts, the same inflection point.

Better contact Judith Curry, you've blown the whole ocean warming thing apart.
The Chief

climber
From the Land of the Mongols
Oct 13, 2013 - 12:29am PT
MONO
Each one is made by a different team, using different methods. That's why you need to average them.

Which then completely nullifies the graph you keep posting to substantiate your consistent proliferation of ideological bullshet....



As well as your flatlining statement in order substantiate your ARGO claim.




Bottomline.... COMPLETE FAIL on BOTH COUNTS!!!!!


MONO
Better contact Judith Curry, you've blown the whole ocean warming thing apart.

NOPE! Just your BULLSHET claims and graphs you utilize in order to substantiate them, MONO.
Messages 14041 - 14060 of total 28524 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
 
Our Guidebooks
Check 'em out!
SuperTopo Guidebooks


Try a free sample topo!

 
SuperTopo on the Web

Review Categories
Recent Trip Report and Articles
Recent Route Beta
Recent Gear Reviews