Twitter / AGW_Prof: 10-15 yrs of T data to claim …
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- Recycling The Same News Every Century
- Arctic Sea Ice Declining Faster Than Expected
- Will Their Masks Protect Them From CO2?
- Global Warming Emergency In The UK
- Mainstream Media Analysis Of DOGE
- Angry And Protesting
- Bad Weather Caused By Racism
- “what the science shows”
- Causes Of Earthquakes
- Precision Taxation
- On the Cover Of The Rolling Stone
- Demise Of The Great Barrier Reef
- Net Zero In China
- Make America Healthy Again
- Nobel Prophecy Update
- Grok Defending Climategate
- It Is Big Oil’s Fault
- Creative Marketing
- No Emergency Or Injunction
- The Perfect Car
- “usually the case”
- Same Old Democrats
- Record Arctic Ice Growth
- Climate Change, Income Inequality And Racism
- The New Kind Of Green
Recent Comments
- conrad ziefle on Recycling The Same News Every Century
- Bob G on Recycling The Same News Every Century
- arn on Recycling The Same News Every Century
- william on Arctic Sea Ice Declining Faster Than Expected
- conrad ziefle on Recycling The Same News Every Century
- conrad ziefle on Will Their Masks Protect Them From CO2?
- william on Will Their Masks Protect Them From CO2?
- gordon vigurs on Will Their Masks Protect Them From CO2?
- Tel on Will Their Masks Protect Them From CO2?
- Bob G on Will Their Masks Protect Them From CO2?
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..