Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- 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
- Spoiled Children
- Great Lakes Storm Of November 11, 1835
- Harris To Win Iowa
- Angry Democrats
- November 9, 1913 Storm
- Science Magazine Explains Trump Supporters
- Obliterating Bill Gates
- Scientific American Editor In Chief Speaks Out
- The End Of Everything
- Harris To Win In A Blowout
- Election Results
- “Glaciers, Icebergs Melt As World Gets Warmer”
- “falsely labeling”
- Vote For Change By Electing The Incumbent
- Protesting Too Much Snow
- Glaciers Vs. The Hockey Stick
Recent Comments
- Gamecock on CO2 To Destroy The World In Ten Years
- dearieme on COP29 Preview
- Greg in NZ on COP29 Preview
- conrad ziefle on A Giant Eyesore
- GeologyJim on A Giant Eyesore
- arn on UK Labour To Save The Planet
- Tel on UK Labour To Save The Planet
- dm on CO2 To Destroy The World In Ten Years
- D. Boss on Michael Mann Cancelled By CNN
- Robertvd on UK Labour To Save The Planet
I think the monkeys are more likely.
I pity the monkeys.
At least the monkeys are getting out and can fly away!!
Al Gore and the Climategate tale have exposed sixty-nine years of deceitful science, . . .
http://omanuel.wordpress.com/about/#comment-8355
and raised questions if the German theoretical nuclear physicist, Dr Carl von Weizsacker, was a Soviet spy who
1. Kept Hitler from building an atomic bomb and winning WWII
2. Kept the public from knowledge of nuclear energy after WWII
The IPCC models are wrong because the IPCC “Bad Science” is wrong. It will continue to be wrong as long as they believe that -24 ºF (-31 ºC) is going to “warm the planet” (the infamous “greenhouse effect”).
Along with the digestive biproducts of caviar and champagne.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/20/science/earth/extremely-likely-that-human-activity-is-driving-climate-change-panel-finds.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
“ Michael E. Mann, a climate scientist at Pennsylvania State University, said he feared the intergovernmental panel, in writing its draft, had been influenced by criticism from climate doubters, who advocate even lower numbers. “I think the I.P.C.C. on this point has once again erred on the side of understating the degree of the likely changes,” Dr. Mann said. However, Christopher B. Field, a researcher at the Carnegie Institution for Science who serves on the panel but was not directly involved in the new draft, said the group had to reflect the full range of plausible scientific views. “I think that the I.P.C.C. has a tradition of being very conservative,” Dr. Field said. “They really want the story to be right.
So.
There you have it from the Gray Lady and two, count them two Top Notch Scientist Types. “…Erred on the side of understating the degree of likely changes”; and, “IPCC has a tradition of being very conservative”. And, “they really want the story to be right”.
Indeed. Let’s get that story right. Stay tuned.
“… influenced by criticism… ” Why just the other day I was told I was an idiot, a flat earther, and the earth was created in 6 or 7 thousands years. I guess I thought that there was and always has been free co2 in the oceans and all not locked up in calcium carbonate.
As if criticism has any influence at all. Even the communist from other communist countries didn’t show up for their parade in NY. Irony.
Or to their Climate Conference.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2014/09/22/u-n-climate-summit-is-high-profile-but-some-of-worlds-most-important-leaders-will-skip-it/
China is still considered communist, isn’t it? I think so.
Well those monkeys have to be coming out of some where other than his face because his oral cavity is constantly spewing a particularly smelly and gross amount of diarrhea.
The one criticism I have of this figure is that you’re pasting the forecast cone on the end of the data. This lets them off the hook. Temps could continue to flatline for another two decades, but as long as you paste the forecast cone on the end of the data it is still an outside possibility. It’s allowing them to move the goalposts.
It would be much better to post the forecast cones contemporaneous with the date the forecast was made. I would start with the 1990 cone coming off at the 1990 temperature, along with each subsequence IPCC forecast cone in different colors. If you can’t squeeze them all onto one graph, you could try stacking them vertically within one graph, or just use different graphs for each.