Twitter / AGW_Prof: 10-15 yrs of T data to claim …
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- 21st Century Toddlers Discuss Climate Change
- “the United States has suffered a “precipitous increase” in hurricane strikes”
- Thing Of The Past Returns
- “Impossible Heatwaves”
- Billion Dollar Electric Chargers
- “Not A Mandate”
- Up Is Down
- The Clean Energy Boom
- Climate Change In Spain
- The Clock Is Ticking
- “hottest weather in 120,000 years”
- “Peace, Relief, And Recovery”
- “Earth’s hottest weather in 120,000 years”
- Michael Mann Hurricane Update
- Michael Mann Hurricane Update
- Making Themselves Irrelevant
- Michael Mann Predicts The Demise Of X
- COP29 Preview
- UK Labour To Save The Planet
- A Giant Eyesore
- CO2 To Destroy The World In Ten Years
- Rats Jumping Off The Climate Ship
- UK Labour To Save The Planet
- “False Claims” And Outright Lies”
- Michael Mann Cancelled By CNN
Recent Comments
- GeologyJim on “the United States has suffered a “precipitous increase” in hurricane strikes”
- oeman50 on “Impossible Heatwaves”
- D. Boss on “the United States has suffered a “precipitous increase” in hurricane strikes”
- arn on 21st Century Toddlers Discuss Climate Change
- Robertvd on 21st Century Toddlers Discuss Climate Change
- William on 21st Century Toddlers Discuss Climate Change
- arn on 21st Century Toddlers Discuss Climate Change
- Gordon Vigurs on Thing Of The Past Returns
- Greg in NZ on Thing Of The Past Returns
- Robertvd on Billion Dollar Electric Chargers
Maybe your post should read
“Lying.to accomplish your goals in life is the new American way to sucess”
Simply amazing the BS that @agw_proff tweets.
This devastating little factoid is killing alarmists. They hate it. Run with it for all it’s worth.
(btw Steve I notice your comment didn’t last long on the Guardian’s polar bear thread. Ho ho, what a surprise.)
A more telling fact is that the AGW crowd based their hysteria on about a 20 year warming trend. So they can argue for destroying the modern world on a 20 year trend, but a 17 year trend is childish to use as a rebuttal? I really am coming to dislike these guys.
…or only a 14 year warming trend, in the US, before fraudulent adjustments:
Goddard: Roots of US data tampering go back 25 years
OMG! Mandia has reproduced. Think of the CO2.
Well I think if his 6 years old would stop growing for some 4-5 years he has a real problem.
This is in perspective the time when we got a warming (about 20 years) and not (17 years).
In addition the 17 years have seen more CO2 anthropogenic emissions then the 20 years before….
(2011 33 mil kt CO2 versus 22 mil kt CO2 in 1990)
http://edgar.jrc.ec.europa.eu/overview.php?v=CO2ts1990-2011&sort=des9
Exactly, but notice the CO2 drops radically every season. Something more powerful at work there – probably called winter at Mauna Loa..