Climate Change skeptics? [ot]

Search
Go

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
Post a Reply
Messages 26681 - 26700 of total 28263 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Ed Hartouni

Trad climber
Livermore, CA
Sep 21, 2014 - 09:19pm PT
"what caused the event"?

presuming there was a cause...

first, define your use of the word "event"
from the above I presume it is the increase of the SST by some value and over some time period. Once you've defined that, you might want to give an indication of how probably that "event" would occur "randomly," that estimate might be found in the expected "variability" of the data set at that particular time (or if you are considering two different time periods, the variability of those two different times).

Once you have an idea of how probably such an "event" is, we might be interested in pursuing the question "what caused it?"


You might also look at the documentation of the dataset...HADSST3GL

The Chief

climber
Laughing at all you angry blinded asshat Sheep
Sep 21, 2014 - 09:20pm PT
In other words neither of you two have any idea nor an answer as to what caused that spike in GLOBAL SST's from 1876 t0 1877.

Ed Hartouni

Trad climber
Livermore, CA
Sep 21, 2014 - 09:22pm PT
you don't have a question...

look here:
http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/hadobs/hadsst3/

"For a detailed description of the dataset and its production process, please read the papers (part 1 and part 2) describing the data set. We recommended you read both papers before using the data.

part 1: http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/hadobs/hadsst3/part_1_figinline.pdf
part 2: http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/hadobs/hadsst3/part_2_figinline.pdf

I don't think you read the papers before using the data...
The Chief

climber
Laughing at all you angry blinded asshat Sheep
Sep 21, 2014 - 09:27pm PT
The hell I don't EDH.

The question I present regarding that period is the exact same question that you and Larry have been so willingly to state as to the reason why SST's have risen since 1979 and are inclusive with all the current supposed "record" diatribe that you all use to perpetuate your bullshet.


Current diatribe to the reason of the recent rise in SST's is due to human emitted C02 into the atmosphere.

Now, what was the cause of the sudden rise in SST's back in 1876-1877?

Same exact situ just a different time period within the "Record" period.



http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/hadobs/hadsst3/part_1_figinline.pdf




Yet NOAA and NASA all use this "erroneous" data in their final reports each month and year and deem them as "highest" on record.

Thus you just answered my original point on the "ACCURACY" of the data beyond 1951 back to 1850.

It is all manipulated verbiage propaganda that is not at all accurate.
Ed Hartouni

Trad climber
Livermore, CA
Sep 21, 2014 - 09:31pm PT
your question is based on the understanding of the dataset,

you didn't read the description of how the dataset is produced, and what its variability (etc) is...

it is possible that you would find that your question is answered in the papers that describe the dataset, especially since it appears you're bothered by a change in a short period of time...


should you be?
you could read the papers and find out.


until then, you don't have a question.
The Chief

climber
Laughing at all you angry blinded asshat Sheep
Sep 21, 2014 - 09:39pm PT
Good Dodge EDH. Right on cue.

your question is based on the understanding of the dataset,

You mean the WOODEN and CANVAS BUCKET collected datasets from the beginning of the "Record" 1850 up and to 1951 in regards to the SST's, EDH? Over 100 years of SST data.


Both papers do nothing more than deem the uncertainty values of those WOODEN and CANVAS collected SST's.

These two words are CC Sciences catch all bullshet saver..

"Homogenized" and "Smoothed"




Regardless the papers you posted EDH, you nor anyone here can point to any reason that may have caused those final accepted and on the "RECORD" rise in temps in HADSST3 data sets from 1876-1877. Which was in fact the largest amount of temp spike in anyone given period throughout the "RECORD" period.

Appears you are now attempting to state that those HADSST3 recorded temps are "erroneous".

But you all sure can pinpoint with a high level of certainty the reason/cause for the latest rise in SST's can't you. Then publicize it as "Highest on Record".

How convenient....


The Chief

climber
Laughing at all you angry blinded asshat Sheep
Sep 21, 2014 - 09:55pm PT
There's Glanton.. I mean FARTMENTAL ....


He of course can not answer that question nor any of the others.

Thus will do what he does best, deflect and dodge with his insistent personal attacks and photos.

The epitome of the AGW ideological propaganda machine.



The Highest on RECORD......
The Chief

climber
Laughing at all you angry blinded asshat Sheep
Sep 21, 2014 - 10:01pm PT
See!


There goes FARTMENTAL with the insistent dodging and personal attacks. He is beyond predictable.


THE HIGHEST ON RECORD!!!



In the meantime, this record within the big picture of the HADSST3's from 1850-2014 paints a pretty picture as to how accurate the data sets are. Regardless if erroneous or not. And to their origins...



Over .70 C SST rise in a period of just over a year. The biggest rise in the entire RECORD period. And EDH claims there is no question...
The Chief

climber
Laughing at all you angry blinded asshat Sheep
Sep 21, 2014 - 10:36pm PT
In the meantime, this record within the big picture of the HADSST3's from 1850-2014 paints a pretty picture as to how accurate the data sets are. Regardless if erroneous or not. And to their origins...



Over .70 C SST rise in a period of just over a year. The biggest rise in the entire RECORD period. And EDH claims there is no question...
The Chief

climber
Laughing at all you angry blinded asshat Sheep
Sep 21, 2014 - 10:37pm PT
In the meantime, this record within the big picture of the HADSST3's from 1850-2014 paints a pretty picture as to how accurate the data sets are. Regardless if erroneous or not. And to their origins...



Over .70 C SST rise in a period of just over a year. The biggest rise in the entire RECORD period. And EDH claims there is no question...
k-man

Gym climber
SCruz
Topic Author's Reply - Sep 21, 2014 - 11:00pm PT
K-man - This is the same old dance. You make bullshit accusations. I call you on them. You play stupid.

Who's stupid? I asked you what is the cause of the sea ice, you said you didn't know. I said you post graphs without knowing their meaning.

If you suddenly do know what the meaning is of the sea ice, tell us. Otherwise you're posting a graph without knowing what it means.

Or you can play dumb, and call others names when they point it out.
Splater

climber
Grey Matter
Sep 22, 2014 - 12:40am PT
No one owes you any answers, esp considering your past history of ignoring numerous long and patient explanations, such as how to tell the difference between a spike and a trend.
Have you ever thanked anyone who took the time to answer you?
But just because I'm feeling merciful on all the others who have to see your repeated demands for attention:
Big El Nino event in 1877-8.
Not hard to look up. Why don't you try it yourself sometime?
For some strange reason it doesn't disprove AGW.
Short lived. Has nothing to do with long term changes.
http://www.met.igp.gob.pe/publicaciones/2009/aceituno_et_al_2009.pdf
The last time we had a big “spike” was the 1998 event.
Today's climate is not a spike; it's a long term trend.

Maybe try reading some of the meaningful information posted to this thread?
Or is it time for another troll?
Sketch

Trad climber
Not FortMental
Sep 22, 2014 - 05:29am PT
k-man

Gym climber
SCruz

Topic Author's Reply - Sep 21, 2014 - 11:00pm PT

Who's stupid? I asked you what is the cause of the sea ice, you said you didn't know. I said you post graphs without knowing their meaning.

If you suddenly do know what the meaning is of the sea ice, tell us. Otherwise you're posting a graph without knowing what it means.

Or you can play dumb, and call others names when they point it out.

K-man -

You asked about the underlying factors contributing to a single line... factors that were unnecessary for understanding the graph. You asked about one thing and then accused me on not knowing about something different.

The graph I posted shows the Antarctic sea ice extent set an all-time (satellite era) high in 2009, then again in 2012 and again in 2013 and yet again in 2014.

What's it mean? Hard to say. But it does indicate the Antarctic sea ice is increasing. The graph also shows the Antarctic sea ice minimum has been well above average in recent years. I'd consider this to support the opinion that the Antarctic sea ice is increasing.
The Chief

climber
Laughing at all you angry blinded asshat Sheep
Sep 22, 2014 - 05:56am PT
In the meantime, the record below that is within the big picture of the HADSST3's from 1850-2014 paints a pretty picture as to how accurate the data sets are. Regardless if erroneous or not. And to their origins...



Over .70 C SST rise in a period of just over a year. The biggest rise aat any one given time within the entire RECORD period. And EDH claims there is no question...


Splater

climber
Grey Matter

Sep 22, 2014 - 12:40am PT



Big El Nino event in 1877-8.
Not hard to look up. Why don't you try it yourself sometime?
For some strange reason it doesn't disprove AGW.

We have a WINNER! Bingo and Precisely.

Just as it did in 1998 where it was the primary driving/forcing factor that year in setting the record for "Highest Temperature" in recorded history.

How about this year and this month in particular... another El Nino event is kicking in. The Pacific equatorial SST's have risen significantly the past six to eight weeks. As have the Kelvin Waves that have flowed in from the Indian Ocean transporting the warm currents. ENSO forcing is playing a NATURAL part in kicking up the Global Surface Temps, again!!

ENSO is a natural event. It is not triggered nor can it be attributed to anything that us HUMANS have done. Not one aspect.

Just another reason to question this liberal bullshet agenda called CAGW!


Oh it's warming alright. As it has been for a longass time. But it has nothing to do with what humans have done. Maybe a small percentage of it has. But no where near what you all claim it has to support your liberal political ideology as exhibited by ALL you nutbags on this thread claiming it has in order to attempt to implement your way of life into society in general.


Maybe try reading some of the meaningful information posted to this thread?

Maybe you all should start to seriously consider it in your sheepism.

ENSO!!! 100% Natural and the most powerful "Warming" event that has BEEN occurring and critically affecting the planets climate for well over 100K years.


After historic climate march, supporters flood to Wall Street


NEW YORK – Monday morning, thousands of protesters are expected to descend on Wall Street and conduct mass civil disobedience to protest what organizers describe as the economic engine behind climate change. This demonstration, called Flood Wall Street, will consist of a mass sit-in near the New York Stock Exchange, emulating the tactics and some of the rhetoric of Occupy Wall Street.
http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/after-historic-climate-march-supporters-flood-wall-street

Just another example of how this all has NOTHING to do with saving the environment. It has EVERYTHING to do with implementing the LIBERAL SOCIAL/POLITICAL IDEOLOGICAL way of life into this country and throughout the world.
Malemute

Ice climber
great white north
Sep 22, 2014 - 07:34am PT
Those Frigid Cold Snaps and Lingering Weather Patterns Have Now Been Linked to Global Warming
The result? Extreme weather is becoming the new normal, with droughts in some places, flooding in others, strengthening tropical cyclones on the Atlantic, loss of polar ice, oceans acidifying, and more.

So while the Mail Online and Wall Street Journal continue to post ridiculous denier talking points, the world continues to heat up. I’ll note that the U.S. has done almost nothing about this, and that is almost entirely due to Republicans in the House and Senate. I’ll also note we have an election coming up, a very important one. Get the facts (I suggest starting here[1] and here[2]), and keep them in mind when you hit the polling booth this November.
http://www.slate.com/blogs/bad_astronomy/2014/09/15/polar_vortex_deep_meanders_in_vortex_linked_to_global_warming.html

http://www.nature.com/ncomms/2014/140902/ncomms5646/full/ncomms5646.html

[1] http://www.slate.com/blogs/bad_astronomy/2014/05/08/climate_change_denial_after_global_warming_report_deniers_deny.html
[2] http://www.slate.com/blogs/bad_astronomy/2014/06/02/climate_change_new_epa_regulations_will_be_fought_by_gop_lt_font_definitions.html
crunch

Social climber
CO
Sep 22, 2014 - 07:42am PT
New York Times, in last couple days:

"Global emissions of greenhouse gases jumped 2.3 percent in 2013 to record levels, scientists reported Sunday..."

"the level of carbon dioxide in the air in 2013 was 42 percent above the level that prevailed before the Industrial Revolution. Other important greenhouse gases have gone up as well, with methane increasing 153 percent from the preindustrial level and nitrous oxide by 21 percent."

"The increase of these and other gases from human activity has caused the planet to warm by about 1.5 degrees Fahrenheit since the preindustrial era, which is causing land ice to melt all over the world..."

"Last week, meteorologists at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration announced that this summer — the months of June, July and August — was the hottest on record for the globe, and that 2014 was on track to break the record for the hottest year, set in 2010."
The Chief

climber
Laughing at all you angry blinded asshat Sheep
Sep 22, 2014 - 07:43am PT
CRUNCH!

Yet the temps have remained steady for the past 15 or so years.



There goes your "correlation" theory.


The result? Extreme weather is becoming the new normal, with droughts in some places, flooding in others, strengthening tropical cyclones on the Atlantic, loss of polar ice, oceans acidifying, and more.

Just more insistent bullshet propaganda from MALNUTS.

IPCC already agreed that so called localized "Extreme Weather" CAN NOT be empirically attributed to to AGW or CC as a whole.
WBraun

climber
Sep 22, 2014 - 07:46am PT
Yet the temps have remained steady for the past 15 or so years.

Yet the "Climate" has changed completely due do mankind's unconscious behavior towards Nature ........
kpinwalla2

Social climber
WA
Sep 22, 2014 - 07:46am PT
http://cliffmass.blogspot.com/2014/09/time-travel-for-northwest-weather.html
The Chief

climber
Laughing at all you angry blinded asshat Sheep
Sep 22, 2014 - 07:47am PT
Yet the "Climate" has changed completely due do mankind's unconscious behavior towards Nature ........

Completely, Werner? From what.... Werner. What is this supposed "NORMAL" climate you and the others here are all crying about.

Someone please post it up with empirical data to back up your claims.


Localized short termed "weather/drought" events DO NOT constitute any viable reason for this claim Werner.

Just another addition to the fear proclamations that are being screamed out as supposed supporting evidence for AGW that have no empirical standing nor merit.
Messages 26681 - 26700 of total 28263 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 Route Beta
Recent Gear Reviews