Global Warming or Global Bullshit?

[SheriffJoe]

For all the Al Gore 'warmers':

Your current global warming 'pause' is now almost old enough to vote and enlist in the military. Think about it...

Is it any wonder these govt-funded idiots are totally laughed at in the real world?

There Are Now 52 Explanations For The Pause In Global Warming

http://dailycaller.com/2014/09/12/there-are-now-52-explanations-for-the-pause-in-global-warming/

Only in academia...

Loser!@#0

 

[akphidelt]

A satellite giving you a temperature reading isn't math.

You are so fucking dumb it is cartoonish.

Lmao, the way they calculate and analyze the data to come up with the actual temperature readings is incredibly complex. You are very dumb. But you also struggle at basic division, so I don't expect much.

 

[Acebb]

Lmao, the way they calculate and analyze the data to come up with the actual temperature readings is incredibly complex.

Um, no it isn't.

 

[akphidelt]

For all the Al Gore 'warmers':

Your current global warming 'pause' is now almost old enough to vote and enlist in the military. Think about it...

Is it any wonder these govt-funded idiots are totally laughed at in the real world?

There Are Now 52 Explanations For The Pause In Global Warming

http://dailycaller.com/2014/09/12/there-are-now-52-explanations-for-the-pause-in-global-warming/

Only in academia...

Loser!@#0

Lmao!! You guys are so dumb all you talk about is atmospheric temperatures. 2014 was the hottest year on record when you take in to account the oceans. But I guess in the conservative world, all that matters is what the temperature in the United States is, lol. You guys are very dumb people.

 

[Acebb]

Lmao, the way they calculate and analyze the data to come up with the actual temperature readings is incredibly complex. You are very dumb. But you also struggle at basic division, so I don't expect much.

You literally do not know what the scientific method is.

 

[akphidelt]

Um, no it isn't.

Lol!! You are really dumb. It's hilarious.

 

[akphidelt]

You literally do not know what the scientific method is.

What does the scientific method have to do with how they calculate global temperatures? You sound like Sheriff Joe, hahahaha. You guys are really dumb.

 

[akphidelt]

Yes, it's very easy math. You are a very dumb person. Poor fella.

[h=3]History[/h] The basic GISS temperature analysis scheme was defined in the late 1970s by James Hansen when a method of estimating global temperature change was needed for comparison with one-dimensional global climate models. Most prior temperature analyses, notably those of Murray Mitchell, covered only 20-90°N latitudes. Our first published results (Hansen et al. 1981) showed that, contrary to impressions from northern latitudes, global cooling after 1940 was small, and there was net global warming of about 0.4°C between the 1880s and 1970s.


The analysis method was documented in Hansen and Lebedeff (1987), showing that the correlation of temperature change was reasonably strong for stations separated by up to 1200 km, especially at middle and high latitudes. They obtained quantitative estimates of the error in annual and 5-year mean temperature change by sampling at station locations a spatially complete data set of a long run of a global climate model, which was shown to have realistic spatial and temporal variability.


This derived error bar only addressed the error due to incomplete spatial coverage of measurements. As there are other potential sources of error, such as urban warming near meteorological stations, etc., many other methods have been used to verify the approximate magnitude of inferred global warming. These methods include inference of surface temperature change from vertical temperature profiles in the ground (bore holes) at many sites around the world, rate of glacier retreat at many locations, and studies by several groups of the effect of urban and other local human influences on the global temperature record. All of these yield consistent estimates of the approximate magnitude of global warming, which now stands at about twice the magnitude that we reported in 1981. Further affirmation of the reality of the warming is its spatial distribution, which has largest values at locations remote from any local human influence, with a global pattern consistent with that expected for response to global climate forcings (larger in the Northern Hemisphere than the Southern Hemisphere, larger at high latitudes than low latitudes, larger over land than over ocean).


Subsequent improvements (Hansen et al. 1999; Hansen et al. 2001) to the original analysis included use of satellite-observed night lights to determine which stations in the United States are located in urban and peri-urban areas, the long-term trends of those stations being adjusted to agree with long-term trends of nearby rural stations.

http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/

 

[akphidelt]

Dude who struggles with basic division is claiming that calculating global mean temperatures is easy math. You can't make this kind of stupid up.

 

[Acebb]

What does the scientific method have to do with how they calculate global temperatures? You sound like Sheriff Joe, hahahaha. You guys are really dumb.

Nothing.

Nobody said otherwise.

Keep responding to things nobody said, dumb fuck.

 

[Acebb]

Dude who struggles with basic division is claiming that calculating global mean temperatures is easy math. You can't make this kind of stupid up.

Of course there are no examples of me struggling with basic division.

You are a laughable liar and imbecile.

 

[Acebb]

Yes, it's very easy math. You are a very dumb person. Poor fella.

So in other words, you paste something you do not understand at all and assume therefore it is complex.

You have a low IQ.

 

[akphidelt]

So in other words, you paste something you do not understand at all and assume therefore it is complex.

You have a low IQ.

Something being complex doesn't mean you don't understand it. Any normal person would consider the calculations they do to calculate a mean average global temperature as complex. You don't even know how they do it, lol. Don't pretend.

You have a really low IQ, you struggle with basic division, lol.

 

[NFLTrends]

Yes, it's very easy math. You are a very dumb person. Poor fella.

[h=3]History[/h] The basic GISS temperature analysis scheme was defined in the late 1970s by James Hansen when a method of estimating global temperature change was needed for comparison with one-dimensional global climate models. Most prior temperature analyses, notably those of Murray Mitchell, covered only 20-90°N latitudes. Our first published results (Hansen et al. 1981) showed that, contrary to impressions from northern latitudes, global cooling after 1940 was small, and there was net global warming of about 0.4°C between the 1880s and 1970s.


The analysis method was documented in Hansen and Lebedeff (1987), showing that the correlation of temperature change was reasonably strong for stations separated by up to 1200 km, especially at middle and high latitudes. They obtained quantitative estimates of the error in annual and 5-year mean temperature change by sampling at station locations a spatially complete data set of a long run of a global climate model, which was shown to have realistic spatial and temporal variability.


This derived error bar only addressed the error due to incomplete spatial coverage of measurements. As there are other potential sources of error, such as urban warming near meteorological stations, etc., many other methods have been used to verify the approximate magnitude of inferred global warming. These methods include inference of surface temperature change from vertical temperature profiles in the ground (bore holes) at many sites around the world, rate of glacier retreat at many locations, and studies by several groups of the effect of urban and other local human influences on the global temperature record. All of these yield consistent estimates of the approximate magnitude of global warming, which now stands at about twice the magnitude that we reported in 1981. Further affirmation of the reality of the warming is its spatial distribution, which has largest values at locations remote from any local human influence, with a global pattern consistent with that expected for response to global climate forcings (larger in the Northern Hemisphere than the Southern Hemisphere, larger at high latitudes than low latitudes, larger over land than over ocean).


Subsequent improvements (Hansen et al. 1999; Hansen et al. 2001) to the original analysis included use of satellite-observed night lights to determine which stations in the United States are located in urban and peri-urban areas, the long-term trends of those stations being adjusted to agree with long-term trends of nearby rural stations.

http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/

This wouldn't be the SAME James Hansen would it?

Dr. James Hansen of NASA, has been the world’s leading promoter of the idea that the world is headed towards “climate disaster.”

 

[NFLTrends]

James Hansen wouldn't be making up global warming stories to get a piece of the $2.6 Billion dollar government pie would he??

http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ostp/FY12-climate-fs.pdf

 

[akphidelt]

This wouldn't be the SAME James Hansen would it?

Dr. James Hansen of NASA, has been the world’s leading promoter of the idea that the world is headed towards “climate disaster.”

What a shocker, the guy who understands the data and has been doing this for decades, thinks the data is pointing to a "climate disaster". Just like 97% of other climate scientists.

 

[NFLTrends]

What a shocker, the guy who understands the data and has been doing this for decades, thinks the data is pointing to a "climate disaster". Just like 97% of other climate scientists.

What about James Hansen who said in 1988 that in 20-30 years New York would be under water?

3 years to go before it happens!!!

Are New Yorkers getting ready?

 

[akphidelt]

What about James Hansen who said in 1988 that in 20-30 years New York would be under water?

3 years to go before it happens!!!

Are New Yorkers getting ready?

Actually he didn't say that at all... this was the question he was asked...

"When I interviewe**d James Hansen I asked him to speculate on what the view outside his office window could look like in 40 years with doubled CO2. I'd been trying to think of a way to discuss the greenhouse effect in a way that would make sense to average readers. I wasn't asking for hard scientific studies. It wasn't an academic interview. It was a discussion with a kind and thoughtful man who answered the question. You can find the descriptio**n in two of my books, most recently The Coming Storm."

Assuming CO2 doubles he predicted the West Side Highway outside his window would be under water.

This is the kind of misleading information I expect from denialists. Even if he is wrong, it's really misleading the way you guys fabricate statements.

 

[NFLTrends]

So... If man can make the whole earth warmer.

What can we do to make it cooler?

Why don't we just to the complete opposite. Since man can change weather one way, its 100% plausible we can have an effect the other way.

Would love to have Vegas at a cool 90 degrees in the summer.

 

[NFLTrends]

Actually he didn't say that at all... this was the question he was asked...

"When I interviewe**d James Hansen I asked him to speculate on what the view outside his office window could look like in 40 years with doubled CO2. I'd been trying to think of a way to discuss the greenhouse effect in a way that would make sense to average readers. I wasn't asking for hard scientific studies. It wasn't an academic interview. It was a discussion with a kind and thoughtful man who answered the question. You can find the descriptio**n in two of my books, most recently The Coming Storm."

Assuming CO2 doubles he predicted the West Side Highway outside his window would be under water.

This is the kind of misleading information I expect from denialists. Even if he is wrong, it's really misleading the way you guys fabricate statements.

Can you show me one James Hansen quote or chart that he "Predicted in the 1980's and 1990's" that's was accurate?

Bet ya cant, cause Ive been looking for almost an hour and I cant find one....