Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- Mission Accomplished
- 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
Recent Comments
- Gordon Vigurs on Mission Accomplished
- Disillusioned on Mission Accomplished
- Bob G on Mission Accomplished
- James Snook on Both High And Low Sea Ice Extent Caused By Global Warming
- czechlist on Mission Accomplished
- 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”
Six Years Is The New Seventeen Years
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.
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..