Pay attention people.

It’s no longer global warming or global cooling it’s
“Global climate change”.

Kind of like saying “the sky is falling” without mentioning the sky or falling, AND you will never be wrong.

It’s F-ing brilliant really.

Shooting ABS or medical plastic?

The NASA paper claims to have pulled out the bad data and corrected for it so that their new data matches the computer models that support global-warming theories.

STOP SCREWING WITH DATA TO MAKE THE DATA CONFORM,DATA DOESNT CARE ABOUT GLOBAL WARMING,COOLING OR ANYTHING ELSE,IT IS ONLY DATA.

P.S. MR GORE,GO SCREW YOURSELF

It would be funny if it weren’t so . . . well . . . cultish.

All those “specifics” are JUST distractions.
What ever the Climate does
it’s wrong,
it’s a disaster
and
it’s YOUR FAULT!!!!

DSchoen on January 23, 2009 at 3:30 PM

You forgot….. AND WE ARE GOING TO TAX YOUR PANTIES OFF FOR IT !!!!!!!

The debate is OVER!
Don’t ask any question’s
There’s no time!

Were all Doooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooomed!

True we do know sooooooo little about long term weather.

However we know a lot about fakes, frauds, charlatans,’ conman’s.

BTW, Global warming is wayyyyyy to specific.

Those who are “enlightened” know its Global CLIMATE CHANGE!

The Global Climate may:
Get Warmer
Get Colder
Or
Not Change at All

All those “specifics” are JUST distractions.
What ever the Climate does
it’s wrong,
it’s a disaster
and
it’s YOUR FAULT!!!!

First, “CO2 traps solar radiation, creating Global Warming.”

Then, “CO2 reflects solar radiation, creating Global Cooling.”

Any Questions?

franksalterego on January 22, 2009 at 7:04 PM

The reason I never believed the AGW hoax is because the same people who said that “CO2 traps solar radiation, creating Global Warming” actually said that “CO2 reflects solar radiation, creating Global Cooling.” It was ‘Global Cooling ‘ that was the ‘hoax du jour’ before it was global warming.

Here is some of what I’m talking about

Maybe…. just maybe people are starting to realize what a grand hoax global warming is.

In the peak of the recent warming trend, 1998 actually ranked 2nd to 1934 as the warmest year on record.

(from the article)

This is more honesty than we normally get on this subject, but it should be pointed out that the “record” they are talking about only goes back 200 years. They are talking about the actual measured temperature record, which is an eye-blink in time compared to earth temperature record from the beginning.

The “reconstructed” temperature records that are suppose to go back thousands of years show that neither 1998 or 1934 are anywhere close to the warmest years. Bottom line, there is no evidence whatsoever that the earth’s temperature in the recent past has been anything but perfectly normal.

The earth is not a static one-way system. It has cycles, it has massive complex systems that ebb and flow based on external forces (uh, like, the Sun and the Moon).

Global warming is a massive myth. Empirical evidence says so.

First, “CO2 traps solar radiation, creating Global Warming.”

Then, “CO2 reflects solar radiation, creating Global Cooling.”

Any Questions?

franksalterego on January 22, 2009 at 7:04 PM

The effect depends on which way the CO2 molecules are aligned. Belly down and the infrared radiation is reflected back to the earth (trapping it in), belly up and it’s reflected back to space (keeping it out).

Uh… didn’t they bother to test these things?

Romeo13 on January 22, 2009 at 6:22 PM

Why test when we can just adjust the data later as necessary? Punt the bug, we’ll patch it later if we have to.

Follow the money………….

…………. prove the “Global Warming Hoax” and implement Social Engineering Leftist Legislation, then you get financed.

Seven Percent Solution on January 22, 2009 at 5:57 PM

That’s what it all boils down to, isn’t it. Insisting on legitimate science is beside the point for these leftist politicians, whose overriding purpose is totalizing gubmit control over our lives.

called it a ’speed bump’

Riiight. Now would that speed bump be for 40 years or 40,000?

But no matter, global cooling causes global warming.

The NASA paper claims to have pulled out the bad data and corrected for it so that their new data matches the computer models that support global-warming theories.

Unfortunately you cannot just ‘toss’ samples in a legitimate scientific study.

So many things wrong here in the gathering of data points. Really to be fair you would have to scrap all the data.

You should use one method of gathering data points. If the used probes that were consistently low then that is acceptable. You can correct for that – not that you really need to in this case to see a warming or cooling trend.

However when they have old probes that trend one way, new probes that trend another, and other temperature monitoring methods being used you cannot trust your data. That is so freaking wrong it is scary.

I spent 10 years working in a lab and would never use data like that for anything other than drawing a very crude assessment before repeating the experiment with better data gathering methods. It certainly wouldn’t be something you release as an actual scientific study.

This is nothing more than propaganda with some unreliable data to back it up.

Drill Baby Drill, then let’s Build Baby Build!

I want the space elevator, diverting important NASA work that could be useful to chase the global warming/climate change bugbear has diverted to much time and energy down a green hole.

I want my flying car dammit!

I’ve been waiting, and we should have them by now!

21st century – bah!

James Hansen’s climate armageddon predictions are based on the idea that the ocean has been absorbing the heat. This article is from 2002 I believe:

Everyone must committ this memory: Whenever you hear the name “James Hansen”, train yourself to call up this tidbit of info….in the ’70s, James Hansen warned of the coming Ice Age.

This man has been galactically wrong on two occasions. He has run out of weather extremes to predict, unless he predicts that the weather will be perfectly normal in 5 years. If he does that, run for your life.

One very distinguished analyst with whom I’m acquainted remarked one time that as a young engineer, he was really excited about becoming a data analyst and how being able to collect, analyze, and extrapolate data would be the way to prove the behavior of systems and to determine the optimum system solution. Until he accompanied a more senior analyst to a meeting for their next assignment and the senior analyst asked the sponsor what result the sponsor wanted the analysts to get.

/not popcorn