Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- Both High And Low Sea Ice Extent Caused By Global Warming
- Record Sea Ice Caused By Global Warming
- “Rapid Antarctic sea ice loss is causing severe storms”
- “pushing nature past its limits”
- Compassion For Terrorists
- Fifteen Days To Slow The Spread
- Maldives Underwater By 2050
- Woke Grok
- Grok Explains Gender
- Humans Like Warmer Climates
- Homophobic Greenhouse Gases
- Grok Explains The Effects Of CO2
- Ice-Free Arctic By 2027
- Red Hot Australia
- EPA : 17.5 Degrees Warming By 2050
- “Winter temperatures colder than last ice age
- Big Oil Saved The Whales
- Guardian 100% Inheritance Tax
- Kerry, Blinken, Hillary And Jefferson
- “Climate Change Indicators: Heat Waves”
- Combating Bad Weather With Green Energy
- Flooding Mar-a-Lago
- Ice-Free Arctic By 2020
- Colorless, Odorless CO2
- EPA Climate Change Arrest
Recent Comments
- arn on Record Sea Ice Caused By Global Warming
- Disillusioned on Record Sea Ice Caused By Global Warming
- Gamecock on “Rapid Antarctic sea ice loss is causing severe storms”
- Disillusioned on “pushing nature past its limits”
- Disillusioned on “pushing nature past its limits”
- czechlist on “Rapid Antarctic sea ice loss is causing severe storms”
- Jehzsa on “pushing nature past its limits”
- arn on Fifteen Days To Slow The Spread
- dm on Fifteen Days To Slow The Spread
- dm on “pushing nature past its limits”
I wish more people would take the time to look at these curves. As well as the NCDC site I’ve been over to the GISS site looking at temperature curves for rural areas I know not to be contaminated by UHIE. Mostly in Wyoming. And I can’t find any catastrophic warming.
I’m assuming that CO2 is still a well mixed gas. Maybe I’m being closed minded if I suggest CO2 has a minimal effect on global temperatures.
Maybe we should test a new hypothysis. What if CO2 is attracted by cement and asphalt and causes a significant GHG effect only in urban areas? Everyone wins.
It’s called GLOBAL warming.
http://woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut3vgl/from:1900/to:2011/plot/hadcrut3vgl/from:1900/to:2011/trend
Looks like the urban heat effect, thermometer adjustments and we are generally warming, which hey is a good thing. Why is the current temperature just right? Warmer is always better. Humans have been around at least 1million years, and we’ve survived all different temperatures.
Looks like the urban heat effect, thermometer adjustments and we are generally warming,
Neither satellites nor the USCHN are subject to UHIE; they show similar warming trends as HadCRUT and GISTEMP. Why is that?
Humans have been around at least 1million years, and we’ve survived all different temperatures.
Our civilization has not been around for at least 1 million years. It’s very young, and it’s highly adapted for the climate we have now. It’s not a matter of individual survivability of warmer temps. If you want to engage in serious discussions of climate, you should know that.
Brendon,
If you continue to spam I am going to start deleting your posts.
That’s not spam, and you know it. If you’re going to post items about local trends, he or anyone else is entitled to comment that local trends have no relevance to global warming. Deleting such a post would be pure censorship.
Your ideas on what constitutes spam continue to amaze.
Same for you Chris.
Steven,
Maybe you should create a Policy page that spells out clearly what is allowed and not allowed. Then Brendon will understand better when his posts are deleted. Just a suggestion.
ChrisD, Humans are very adaptable, and true our civilization really didn’t begin probably until we started using energy, which means we discovered oil which has 7 times the energy density of TNT. The key to our survival is to keep using energy as much as possible. Not turn back the clock and go back to the dark ages. This has happened to our civilisation several times before, eg the burning of the great library in Alexandra. The anti-progressive and extreme religious want to restrict knowledge/science/energy use to gain power and maintain it. This is a very dangerous situation and ultimately like the 1930s pseudoscience of eugenics, if the pseudoscience of AGW is successful it will end in a world war as people will start suffering and dying if we cut their energy which is basically keeping them alive all because your worried that the sea is increasing a few millimetres a year just as it has at the same rate since 1850 and CO2 has risen 100-200 parts in 1,000,000 parts
Not turn back the clock and go back to the dark ages.
This is a continued refrain of the “skeptic” community; unfortunately, no one has suggested, or is suggesting, doing that.
Humans are very adaptable
In this case, human adaptability is likely to involve mass migration. In dayes of olde, that involved a few hundred thousand people picking up their clubs and walking away. It won’t be like that next time, and no one is going to like it much.
So your wanting to restrict energy, so that the poor around the world will basically die, how does that save them from a slight change in temperature if it’s even occuring? I get it, we will let them die of starvation to save them from the big monster storm that was in the Copenhagen movie?
This one doesn’t even merit a response.
Brendan,
Can you show us what the warming trend is prior to adjustments + provide explanations for any adjustments made?
Thanks for the offer, but no, providing you with specific information is not my job.
If you have a point to make, then do so and provide evidence to supoprt your argument.
every series of data here is either completely invalid due to faulty methodology or completely contrived by global warming cultists with total disregard for the scientific method and good simple honesty. self serving, cherry picked bollocks from the bollocks merchants—- caveat emptor
Um ChrisD, it has to do with posting same link in more than one post… not the content. SPAM has a definition…
Same problem in both posts.
Steve highlights a local station’s data in order to give the perception that warming is not happening.
I posted the same comment in each of his posts to address this issue.
That he plans to censor such comments in the future suggests he is planning to post again in this manner and that he finds my simple rebuttal damaging.
You are making dozens of posts a day, with a very low signal to noise ratio, and repeating your self over and over and over again.
Brendon says:
I posted the same comment in each of his posts to address this issue
——————–
That you post the same stuff/nonsense over and over and over again is tiresome and boring. We all saw your links the first hundred times you posted them. Posting them for a 101st time adds nothing. If someone keep posting the same thing in reply to your posts I suspect you’d quickly get annoyed that rather than addressing what you are saying they are just cutting and pasting a “pat” reply as if it addressed what they were saying when it does no such thing.
Steve is simply applying Mann’s teleconnections hypothesis to rural temperature stations.
I am gobsmacked that you think the teleconnections hypothesis is bunk…
John Endicott says: “That you post the same stuff/nonsense over and over and over again is tiresome and boring.”
If Steve continues to make the same mistakes in different threads, then I feel it justified to highlight them again.
I make no apology for that. I wish Steve would stop making the same basic error, but this seems unlikely.
It has been cooling in Illinois. The impact of global warming on Illinois peaked in 1930 and over the last 80 years we’ve had a .1F degree per decade cooling. There has been a noticeable improvement in my fruit trees which have benefited greatly from the extra CO2 over the last 30 years.
That graph does not show global warming. If it does I haven’t had enough coffee today.
Chris
You say satellites show similar warming to HADCRUT+GISS.
Can you give us the data?
Well, I posted this but it seems to have disappeared. Let’s try again.
OK, that time it worked. The plot is a response to Paul H’s question:
Steven do not delete Brendon even if he is spamming. He is like court Jester sometimes he tells truth, but mostly makes fool of himself.
I thought the Medieval warming is localized, well if the chart is showing warming then it’s localized too. Weather is not climate and it’s localized LOL
This planet has been in an ice age for 2 and a half million years. Periods of glaciation last about 90,000 years and warm periods last about 10,000 years. It’s been about 10,500 years since the last glaciation. The peak of this warming period ended a long time ago. Most of the glaciers are growing. The oceans will not rise any more, they will instead drop about 450 feet to their normal level. The coastline will spread to the edge of the continental shelf. Canada and the northern states will have a mile or more deep glaciers push people and their buildings slowly south. New York City will be pushed into a big pile into the Long Island Sound. CO2 and criminal lies about global warming won’t change it.
Brendon,
105 years is getting to be a long time to show that CO2 fails to warm up a state.
Since CO2 is supposed to be everywhere,why is there no warming going on in many “local” areas of America?
Maine,Georgia and Iowa are not warming up either.
Regions where CO2 SHOULD (according to the AGW hypothesis) be having a warming presence but does not.Does it make you wonder?