UN Says Now That The World Did Not End In 2000

16 Responses to UN Says Now That The World Did Not End In 2000

1. Mike Davis says:

   January 20, 2011 at 3:49 pm

   Do they realize they also confirmed that the temperature was flat for 13 years? They also need to realize these temperature reading are well within error of being the same as the temperatures in the 30s.
   There claims of long term warming are BS!

   Reply
   • drewski says:

     January 20, 2011 at 8:07 pm

     According to ALL the institutions that record world temperatures, the hottest 10 years have all been since 1998. I suppose you could call that “flat” like the top step in a staircase is flat. And I also expect that we can get another 13 years of “flat’ weather when we get out of the current La Nina and solar minimum, but we are going to need a higher staircase.

     Reply
     • BioBob says:

       January 20, 2011 at 8:18 pm

       And you actually trust the data reported by these organizations after examining the HarryReadMe file and this kind of thing ?

       http://www.transworldnews.com/NewsStory.aspx?storyid=671981&ret=close

       Reply
     • peterhodges says:

       January 20, 2011 at 9:32 pm

       i am sure he does. warmcold causes droughtfloods, and snow accumulation causes glaciers to retreat, while warming causes glaciers to advance

       and his ‘all’ quantifier is just plain wrong.

       Reply
     • BioBob says:

       January 20, 2011 at 9:42 pm

       I read that HarryReadMe and was totally disgusted. These guys are not only incompetent, they are amoral. The emails were nothing compared to the data-cooking …

       Reply
     • drewski says:

       January 21, 2011 at 3:29 am

       Science and Public Policy Institute?!! THEY are your reference?!!! Hahahahahahahahahaha.

       Boy you sCeptics really know how to pick ’em.

       SPPI’s Chief Scientific Advisor, Willie Soon, has clear corporate connections with the energy industry. In 2003, He authored a study alongside Sallie Baliunas and three others, which dismissed concerns regarding climate change. The study, called Reconstructing Climatic and Environmental Changes of the Past 1,000 Years: A Reappraisal, was published in the British scientific journal, Energy and Environment. According to a report in the Seattle Post Intelligence, The research was underwritten by the American Petroleum Institute, the trade association of the world’s largest oil companies. They also reported that ‘two of the five authors are scientists who have been linked to the coal industry and have received support from the ExxonMobil Foundation’, whilst a further two of the authors are affiliated with the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics and are ‘senior scientists’ with Washington-based organization the George C Marshall Institute, which received support from ExxonMobil Corp. It is also worth noting that the Marshall Institute’s President is William O’Keefe, a former executive of the American Petroleum Institute and President of ‘the Global Climate Coalition, a now-defunct organization created by oil and coal interests to lobby against U.S. participation in climate treaties, such as the Kyoto Protocol

       Reply
       • stevengoddard says:

         January 21, 2011 at 3:59 am

         I take it you don’t trust anyone who receives money.
     • Baa Humbug says:

       January 21, 2011 at 4:05 am

       Drewski I can confidently say you are an IDIOT

       Have you not seen the myriad of “big oil” “big nuclear” and “big everything” who financially support the UEA/CRU?

       How about the financial support for alarmists from Gordon ‘we have 60 days to save the world’ Brown?

       How about the financial support for alarmists from Kevin ‘the greatest moral challenge of our time ‘ Rudd?

       How about BP (Beyond Petroleum) financial support for alarmists universities all over the world?

       And on and on and on to the tune of billions.

       YOU IDIOT

       Reply
     • Dave N says:

       January 21, 2011 at 4:50 am

       Your logic is astounding. Apparently, facts can become untrue merely because of where the money came from to produce them.

       Of course, if political groups with an agenda to tax the public fund a study, their results must be true, because the money didn’t come from somewhere else, right?

       Go back to school, Drewski.

       Reply
     • BioBob says:

       January 21, 2011 at 4:53 am

       drwski does not listen to you

       my job is to pick up all little poops drewski likes to leave.

       watch your step

       Reply
     • Amino Acids in Meteorites says:

       January 21, 2011 at 5:51 am

       drewski

       What were those links to the coal industry you spoke of? Detail them please. Many universities have gotten money from Exxon. If you went to university it is possible it got money from Exxon too.

       Stephen Schneider got $100,000,000.00 from Exxon.

       That’s $100 million.

       Who is Stephen Schneider? Have a look:

       http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uwZLbFm-X3Q

       Reply
     • Amino Acids in Meteorites says:

       January 21, 2011 at 5:59 am

       drewski says:
       January 20, 2011 at 8:07 pm

       According to ALL the institutions that record world temperatures, the hottest 10 years have all been since 1998

       Simmer down sir. You are flipping out over 1/100ths of a degree. It was warmer on earth 1000 years ago during the Medieval Warm Period than the 12 years since 1998. It was warmer on earth 2000 years ago during the Roman Warm Period than now. And so on.

       Your ilk exaggerates about how warm the earth is now, screaming with red face and veins sticking out on your neck, that the earth is frying, the sky is falling.

       Reply
     • Amino Acids in Meteorites says:

       January 21, 2011 at 6:05 am

       David Suzuki gets funding from petroleum companies, yes, that David Suzuki.

       Reply
2. BioBob says:

   January 20, 2011 at 11:38 pm

   ROFL

   “Combined with the ±0.2 C average station error, a representative lower-limit uncertainty of ±0.46 C was found for any global annual surface air temperature anomaly. This ±0.46 C reveals that the global surface air temperature anomaly trend from 1880 through 2000 is statistically indistinguishable from 0 C”
   http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/01/20/surface-temperature-uncertainty-quantified/#more-32079

   Reply
   • Mike Davis says:

     January 21, 2011 at 4:26 am

     Biobob:
     I found that one after I wrote what I did at the top!
     What I have read about global surface temperature records I would not give them that narrow of a range of error. The sea surface temperature records are beyond worthless garbage!

     Reply
3. JeffT says:

   January 21, 2011 at 2:16 pm

   So what? That’s my answer to all this Globaloney nonsense.

   Reply