Twenty-five years ago, the French Prime Minister was racing to save the planet from climate disaster.
And twenty-five years later, the French President is racing to save the planet from climate disaster.
Future of planet at stake, says Hollande at climate … | Etalia
The planet hasn’t actually warmed since 1990, but politicians should never let facts get in the way of a good tax and control scam.
Hi Steven. Your graph is wrong. Use this trend calculator: http://www.ysbl.york.ac.uk/~cowtan/applets/trend/trend.html
Select RSS, then enter 1990 as the start date and 2015 as the end date. The trend is 0.107C per decade. So the world really is warming.
[SG : Only a complete moron would run a linear fit through the Mt Pinatubo cooling, which I tried to explain for those with functioning brains]
Hi Martin. He wasn’t addressing a trend beginning in 1990, and never made that claim. He was pointing out the temp today is the same as 1990. That is verified with your “trend” link….
On your “trend” interactive, when you select RSS, then enter 1990 as the start date and 2015.90 as the end date, your Dr. Kevin Cowtan interactive shows the SAME thing Steven’s graph of RSS shows – Regardless of the “trend”, global temp today is almost the same now as it was in 1990.
(AndyG55, I don’t believe it is because of zero understanding or comprehension of what has been presented. I believe Martin is purposefully twisting.)
And 1990 had a large cooling effect from the Mt Pinatubo eruption.
He may be purposefully twisting.. but it always comes across as gross ignorance.
Plausible deniability. It’s a completely essential part of any kind of disinformation.
Martin proved he’s a shill beyond any doubt this morning, when he admitted that the mythical feedbacks are the main driver for the mythical warming, while screaming “SETTLED SCIENCE” the whole time.
I hope he sticks around as the current El Nino subsides, and the following La Nina takes effect 😉
You just don’t understand, gentlemen. Martin Smith is a humanist Buddhist Christian rugged individualist libertarian and a part-time revolutionary militiaman. He has a lot of things on his mind. On top of it, he’s racing to save the planet and find the right graph, so cut him some slack.
Colorado, you are deliberately misrepresenting what I wrote. I advocate for personal freedom. I am not a “rugged individualist libertarian.” And I believe that oppressive states should be removed by force, once peaceful means have been exhausted. I am not a “part-time revolutionary militiaman.” If you have to lie to make a point, you don’t have a point.
Corrections:
Martin Smith is for individual liberty, but not ruggedly so. He likes removing politically persistent oppressive states by revolutionary force but he wants the world to know he’s not a militiaman, not even part-time. He’s busy finding the right graph.
“deliberately misrepresenting what I wrote”
How can anyone misrepresent meaningless garbage?
“And I believe that oppressive states should be removed by force”
So, you are totally against the AGW agenda. correct !!
Because that is the final aim of the AGW agenda.
You are just way too THICK to have figured that out yet.
Martin-
By what means do you propose we remove said oppressive states? You’ve explicitly called for total disarmament of citizens.
Ted, I was curious if Martin Smith ever answers your question but it seems he does have a lot of things on his mind and he’s too busy finding the right graph, anyway.
In the meantime, here are my thoughts based on the leitmotif of his extensive writings:
He could be a green traditionalist, a pitchforks-and-torches kind of guy when his patience finally runs out and when he starts removing said oppressive governments. He could be into renewable weapons like longbows or crossbows. He may prefer a scimitar for close man-on-man combat. He could be a martial arts expert using his bare hands against corrupt local land use department officials or some such.
I must stress that all of this is strictly a conjecture of mine. I don’t want to be accused of lying just because I was trying to help out and chronicle the rich and complex legacy of his thought.
I wish he would clarify the subject and not leave his fan base in the dark.
No, Dis, it’s not the same. It’s higher. And, again, and again, and once again, there is no reason to ONLY choose the RSS dataset. Choose any of the others. Choose ALL of them. The global average temperature is higher now than it was in 1990. Why did you ONLY choose RSS? The answer is: Because it kind’a shows that things haven’t changed all that much so the French President was wrong? No, that’s silly. Steven’s rant is silly.
He could have criticized both French Presidents for saying the future of the planet is at stake. It isn’t. The planet will do just fine no matter what we do. But the future of the human race is at stake, and that’s what both French Presidents actually meant. I think you guys, even Steven, are intelligent enough to know that is what they really meant, and I think you guys, but maybe not Steven, are intelligent enough to see why Steven’s rant really is silly.
So let’s summarize. The French Presidents meant the future of the human race is at stake, not the future of the planet. The French Presidents did not mean “the future” as referring to 25 years into the future. A 25 year period does not indicate whether the future of the planet is at stake. There is NO reason to only select the RSS dataset, when all the others are available. The RSS dataset represents temperature in the lower troposphere, NOT the surface temperature where we live. The RSS dataset does NOT show the temperature is the same now as it was in 1990, and the other datasets ALL show the temperature has changed even more.
So let’s all stop cherry-picking one dataset over the others, and let’s all stop making silly accusations of fraud.
Martin Smith: ” Why did you ONLY choose RSS?
I didn’t. YOU did. I merely followed YOUR instructions to Steven: “Select RSS, then enter 1990 as the start date and 2015 as the end date.”
Not only do you post a trend interactive when Steven wasn’t talking trend, now you dishonestly twist that I have chose RSS. More evidence of your dishonest twisting.
Martin Smith: “No, Dis, it’s not the same. It’s higher.”
Yeah, it shows the RSS global average shows a tenth of a degree warmth since 1990. Big Freaking Whoop! That’s also taking into consideration there’s an El Nino right now. Get back to us at this time NEXT YEAR when we’re into the La Nina.
Martin Smith: ” And, again, and again, and once again, there is no reason to ONLY choose the RSS dataset.”
Actually, again, and again, and once again, the fact that it’s the least-corrupted dataset IS a reason.
And it looks like even NASA is preparing to abandon your “settled science” religion.
http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/628524/Climate-change-shock-Burning-fossil-fuels-COOLs-planet-says-NASA
None of your contortions help out the fact that your man-made paradigm is crumbling.
😉
No, you are WRONG BAGAIN , Marty.
We use RSS and UAH because they are the only VALIDATED temperature data sets.
The trend matches almost exactly with the only PRISTINE surface data sample in the world, USCRN.
You have again shown that you understand basically NOTHING of what has been shown in the blog post..
You base-level IGNORANCE shines through like a beacon.
The only reason the human race might be in peril is because of the MORONIC actions of the AGW proponents in trying to restrict the necessary output of CO2, while at the same time trying to bring in a massive totalitarian world government to control everyone and everything, through massive far-left political propaganda brain-washing.
That is the REAL and IMMEDIATE threat to mankind.
And YOU are either part of it.. or more likely a VICTIM of it.
Darn typos and no spell check on caps..
YOU ARE WRONG AGAIN !!!
You are batting ZERO from numerous meaningless rants, little gorebot.
Give up, while you still have one functional brain cell left.
“Give up, while you still have one functional brain cell left.”
I imagine he cannot easily give up, as I suspect his crusade may be about fear of loss – loss of funding. As long as pee reviewed (steered) funding dictates ‘scientific study’, his type will be crowing that HadCrut, GISS, NOAA and the rest of the surface artifacts are legitimate – empirical measurements be damned.
You really are a complete buffoon, Martin.
Get a life.
Steven, you didn’t say anything about running “a linear fit through the Mt Pinatubo cooling,” and there is nothing wrong with computing a linear trend through any set of data, as long as it is clear what the data actually represent. We know that aerosols in the atmosphere have a cooling effect on the global average temperature, and we know that volcanoes add lots of aerosols to the atmosphere. This is why aerosol data are input to the global climate models.
The point here is that your attempt to discredit two French Presidents was kind of pathetic.
“and there is nothing wrong with computing a linear trend through any set of data”
roflmao..
Your mathematical ignorance and ineptitude is again writ large.
You really have NO IDEA, do you. !!
Give the MONKEY a ruler .. see if it can draw a straight line. 😉
You have just shown that, again, you have zero understanding or comprehension of what has been presented. Well done for the continued display of your ignorance. 🙂
That was obvious meant as a reply to stalker Martin the gorebog.
Must be REALLY SAD sitting around at this time of year waiting for SG to post so you can be first responder.
If that is all you miserable life comprises of .. I really PITY you.
Hilarity from the British Met….
Climate Change “Causing Colder British Winters” say Met Office chief scientist
https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2015/12/21/nice-one-julia/
And she blamed the melting of the Arctic, which of course has done a major rebound this year.
http://s19.postimg.org/5ozd4cqer/dmi181215.jpg
And blamed it on the warming of the Arctic since 2007
http://s19.postimg.org/i7k87yl9v/UAH_No_Pol.jpg
Well SG, now they have found a reason for the pause, that explains it, but still give them a reason to say it’s all bad, bad, bad. Check this one out from NASA:
Climate change shock: Burning fossil fuels ‘COOLS planet’, says NASA
http://www.google.com/gwt/x?noimg=1&u=http%3a%2f%2fwww.express.co.uk%2fnews%2fuk%2f628524%2fClimate-change-shock-Burning-fossil-fuels-COOLs-planet-says-NASA&wsc=tb&ct=pg1&whp=30
Just read that, rah. More “settled science”.
More of that “settled science”.
http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/628524/Climate-change-shock-Burning-fossil-fuels-COOLs-planet-says-NASA
ROTFLMAO!
I love the comments.
It seems most have figured out it is a scam and NASA is trying to save CAGW by piling lies on top of lies. NASA is well aware that the quiet sun will cause cooling going forward and they are scrambling to find a way to blame the up coming cooling on EVIL humans instead of the sun.
http://memesvault.com/wp-content/uploads/Rolling-On-The-Floor-Laughing-Animated-Gif-07.jpg
Yes.. it certainly is very funny 🙂
Marty.. you really need to read that link and all the comments.
That idiocy from the climate glitterati is what YOU are trying to support.
Does it make you feel proud, and intelligent. 😉
And Marty gorebot and cfool..
…..try not to have a apoplectic fit. 🙂
Whoops sorry, forgot your brain-age..
Try not to chuck a TANTRUM ! 😉
The greatest danger to society is totalitarian leaders of nations who use public funds to generate research grants for scientists who manipulate, hide or ignore experimental data to fit the political agenda of these tyrants.
George Orwell recognized a new tyrannical government was coming in 1946 when he moved from London to the Scottish Isle of Jura to start writing the futuristic novel that describes the current state of world government: “Nineteen Eighty-Four“ http://www.online-literature.com/orwell/1984/