Ok, this global warming shit is getting out of hand...

[k2skier112]

RJ, stfuyic

[muted]

I haven't read the book and know nothing about the author

:
No need to understand completely what you preach: no worries there! That would take A LOT of time and thinking. Just pass on those articles Rush has vetted, we appreciate you. He does the hard thinkin’ work for us, bless his heart. National treasure!

[WMD]

I linked the book because you accused me of lying. It's pretty unlikely a book is going to have a 4.5 star rating with 600+ reviews on amazon if it's all just lies like you claim.

Wow, 600+ reviews by anyone on Amazon absolutely is equal to peer review by PhD's. And there is definitely no way there could be 600+ wackos or Koch employees (might they be the same thing?) who would review a book on Amazon. For sure proves the book is legit. Damn, you win again!

[ron johnson]

:
No need to understand completely what you preach: no worries there! That would take A LOT of time and thinking. Just pass on those articles Rush has vetted, we appreciate you. He does the hard thinkin’ work for us, bless his heart. National treasure!

If you are already familiar with the Mann saga, there isn't much of a reason to bother reading about it again.

I've never listened to Rush in my life.

[ron johnson]

Wow, 600+ reviews by anyone on Amazon absolutely is equal to peer review by PhD's. And there is definitely no way there could be 600+ wackos or Koch employees (might they be the same thing?) who would review a book on Amazon. For sure proves the book is legit. Damn, you win again!

To be honest it's amazing that it has 4.5 stars. Partisan books like that often get spammed by people like you with 1 star reviews.

Hendrik Tennekes, peer-reviewed PhD and former director of the Royal Meteorological Institute of the Netherlands - "The behavior of Michael Mann is a disgrace to the profession."

It's 2020 and Mann still won't release his data behind the hockey stick. Tim Ball, peer-reviewed PhD said, "Micheal Mann should be in the State Pen, not Penn State." Mann then sued Ball for libel in 2011. As part of the discovery process, Ball requested Mann's data for the hockey stick. Mann delayed and delayed the process, never giving up his data, until just last year when the judge dismissed Mann's claims with prejudice and awarded court costs to Ball.

https://www.manhattancontrarian.com/...en-to-be-fraud

[WMD]

To be honest it's amazing that it has 4.5 stars. Partisan books like that often get spammed by people like you with 1 star reviews.

Hendrik Tennekes, peer-reviewed PhD and former director of the Royal Meteorological Institute of the Netherlands - "The behavior of Michael Mann is a disgrace to the profession."

It's 2020 and Mann still won't release his data behind the hockey stick. Tim Ball, peer-reviewed PhD said, "Micheal Mann should be in the State Pen, not Penn State." Mann then sued Ball for libel in 2011. As part of the discovery process, Ball requested Mann's data for the hockey stick. Mann delayed and delayed the process, never giving up his data, until just last year when the judge dismissed Mann's claims with prejudice and awarded court costs to Ball.

https://www.manhattancontrarian.com/...en-to-be-fraud

So you admit it is a partisan book. Science isn't partisan...

Yes, your 2 PhD's proves the National Academy of Science is all wrong about Mann for their "recognition of his distinguished and continuing achievements in original research." Haha.

As for the hockey stick, it's conclusions have been replicated by many other researchers. There is lots of public data out there and it all matches Mann's. Good lie about him refusing to show the data, though. Your bullshit is getting thicker as your argument gets thinner.

An independent assessment of Mann's hockey stick was conducted by the National Center for Atmospheric Research (Wahl 2007). They reconstructed temperatures employing a variety of statistical techniques (with and without principal components analysis). Their results found slightly different temperatures in the early 15th Century. However, they confirmed the principal results of the original hockey stick - that the warming trend and temperatures over the last few decades are unprecedented over at least the last 600 years.

While many continue to fixate on Mann's early work on proxy records, the science of paleoclimatology has moved on. Since 1999, there have been many independent reconstructions of past temperatures, using a variety of proxy data and a number of different methodologies. All find the same result - that the last few decades are the hottest in the last 500 to 2000 years (depending on how far back the reconstruction goes).

https://www.skepticalscience.com/bro...ckey-stick.htm

[ron johnson]

So you admit it is a partisan book. Science isn't partisan...

I mean partisan in the sense of beliefs, not politics.

Yes, your 2 PhD's proves the National Academy of Science is all wrong about Mann for their "recognition of his distinguished and continuing achievements in original research." Haha.

I'm just pointing out that there are peer-reviewed PhD's that view Mann as a fraud since you seem to think so highly of the opinions of people with that title.

As for the hockey stick, it's conclusions have been replicated by many other researchers. There is lots of public data out there and it all matches Mann's. Good lie about him refusing to show the data, though. Your bullshit is getting thicker as your argument gets thinner.



https://www.skepticalscience.com/bro...ckey-stick.htm

The paper SkS refers to as being "independent" was authored by a co-author with Mann (Eugene Wahl) and a PhD student of Mann at the time (Caspar Ammann). Does that sound like independent to you? The paper didn't refute the work of McIntyre and McKitrick, and no surprise SkS doesn't mention any of the responses to that paper such as: https://climateaudit.files.wordpress...ply.ammann.pdf

SkS does not say that Mann has ever released his data, or that his hockey stick has ever been replicated. They attempt to validate the hockey stick by saying that other proxie reconstructions have found recent decades to be the warmest of the past 500-2000 years, but neglect to mention other reconstructions that don't find that to be the case.

[WMD]

I mean partisan in the sense of beliefs, not politics.



Blah blah blah
Obfuscate and bullshit



.

Science isn't belief. Religion is based on belief, referred to as faith, so there are believers or non-believers. Science is based on facts. You can accept them or deny them, but they are still facts and are real whether you believe them or not. Gravity, a round earth, anthropogenic climate change are all proven facts. Denial doesn't stop them.

From the article below:

“You can only be smacked in the face by evidence so many times and not see some kind of pattern. (You will never guess: a HOCKEY STICK!).

“The hockey stick is alive and well. There is now so much data supporting this observation that it will take nothing short of a revolution of how we understand all paleoclimate proxies to overturn this pattern. So let me make this prediction: the hockey stick is here to stay.”

“The hockey stick is alive; long live the hockey stick. Climate denialists will have to find another excuse behind which to hide.”

Planet Earth is warmer than it has been for at least 2,000 years, according to a study that took its temperature from 692 different “natural thermometers” on every continent and ocean on the planet.

In the most comprehensive assessment of how the climate has changed over the period to date, researchers looked at a host of sources of historic information, including tree rings, ice cores, lake and sea sediments, corals, mineral deposits and written records.

What they found confirmed the famous “hockey stick” graph, showing an undulating, but broadly flat, line followed by a sharp uptick that begins at around 1900.

The only plausible explanation for this sudden change is fossil fuel emissions, which have increased the level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere from about 280 parts per million in the 19th century to more than 400 today.

The warming effect was predicted by the Nobel Prize-winning Swedish scientist Svante Arrhenius in 1895.

Writing in the journal Scientific Data, a team of nearly 100 researchers described how they had created a database of 692 records from 648 different locations in “all

from 648 different locations in “all continental regions and major ocean basins”.

Some of these natural thermometers covered the entire 2,000-year period, with an average length of 760 years.

The original hockey stick graph, which spanned 1,000 years, was widely praised when it was published in the journal Nature 20 years ago, but also came under attack from climate change sceptics and deniers. Professor Michael Mann, one of the paper’s authors, was abused, made the subject of hostile investigations by US politicians, and even sent death threats.

In a blog post about the new study, one of researchers, Professor Julien Emile-Geay, wrote that it essentially confirmed the hockey stick graph was accurate.

“As a scientist, you have to go where the evidence takes you,” he said.

“You can only be smacked in the face by evidence so many times and not see some kind of pattern. (You will never guess: a HOCKEY STICK!).

“The hockey stick is alive and well. There is now so much data supporting this observation that it will take nothing short of a revolution of how we understand all paleoclimate proxies to overturn this pattern. So let me make this prediction: the hockey stick is here to stay.”

Mr Emile-Geay, of the University of Southern California, said any argument about the basic pattern of warming was over.

“In the coming years and decades, the scientific community will flesh out many more details about the climate of the past 2,000 years, the interactions between temperature and drought, their regional and local expressions, their physical causes, their impact on human civilizations, and many other fascinating research questions,” he said.


“But one thing won’t change: the 20th century will stick out like a sore thumb. The present rate of warming and, very likely, the temperature levels are exceptional in the past 2,000 years, perhaps even longer.

“The hockey stick is alive; long live the hockey stick. Climate denialists will have to find another excuse behind which to hide.”

https://www.independent.co.uk/enviro...-a7837881.html

[ron johnson]

Science isn't belief. Religion is based on belief, referred to as faith, so there are believers or non-believers. Science is based on facts. You can accept them or deny them, but they are still facts and are real whether you believe them or not. Gravity, a round earth, anthropogenic climate change are all proven facts. Denial doesn't stop them.

There are very few established facts when it comes to climate change. CO2 is a greenhouse gas, beyond that it's all theory and guesswork.

From the article below:

“You can only be smacked in the face by evidence so many times and not see some kind of pattern. (You will never guess: a HOCKEY STICK!).

“The hockey stick is alive and well. There is now so much data supporting this observation that it will take nothing short of a revolution of how we understand all paleoclimate proxies to overturn this pattern. So let me make this prediction: the hockey stick is here to stay.”

“The hockey stick is alive; long live the hockey stick. Climate denialists will have to find another excuse behind which to hide.”



https://www.independent.co.uk/enviro...-a7837881.html

The paper your article is based on uses the PAGES2k temperature reconstruction. It's quite ironic that the same guy behind the Mann hockey stick debunking, Steve McIntyre, finds problems with the PAGES2k database as well. One of the main results of the hockey stick saga was that the 2006 NAS panel recommended avoiding stripbark chronologies in temperature reconstructions, but PAGES2k ignores this recommendation, because without stripbark chronologies there is no hockey stick.

I doubt you ever read anything I ever link but here you go anyway:
https://climateaudit.org/2019/02/01/...rctic-proxies/
https://climateaudit.org/2018/10/07/pages2k-2017-south-america-revisited/
https://climateaudit.org/2018/10/24/...-ring-proxies/

[WMD]

I doubt you ever read anything I ever link but here you go anyway:

I skimmed your bullshit, but I did read this part. Haha. Your false arguments and links aren't credible enough to waste time on.

There is no debate on this even though you and your bosses have a lot of money to make by confusing people and making it seem there is just enough to delay climate action.

[ron johnson]

I skimmed your bullshit, but I did read this part. Haha. Your false arguments and links aren't credible enough to waste time on.

There is no debate on this even though you and your bosses have a lot of money to make by confusing people and making it seem there is just enough to delay climate action.

Back to the lies and bullshit schtick eh?

Actually my bosses have a lot of money to make with solar panels, remember?

[dan_pdx]

I linked the book because you accused me of lying. It's pretty unlikely a book is going to have a 4.5 star rating with 600+ reviews on amazon if it's all just lies like you claim.

Oh sure, a 4.5 star rating with 600+ reviews on Amazon is above reproach, but near consensus among thousands and thousands of climate scientists is what, a conspiracy to wank each other off for tenure? Makes sense, I'm glad we have you here to explain things.

[ron johnson]

Oh sure, a 4.5 star rating with 600+ reviews on Amazon is above reproach, but near consensus among thousands and thousands of climate scientists is what, a conspiracy to wank each other off for tenure? Makes sense, I'm glad we have you here to explain things.

I only linked the book because WMD accused me of lying, and he doesn't read any of the other links I give. The only point I was trying to make is that it's going to be pretty unlikely that everything I'm saying is a lie when there is an actual book on the subject with such a positive rating. Do you disagree?

What exactly is the consensus you are referring to? If you mean that CO2 is greenhouse gas and humans influence climate then you can include me in the consensus.

[k2skier112]

RJ posting about polar vortex to dispute GW in 3-2-1...

Arctic blast set to punish Northeast with cold, May snow
https://www.accuweather.com/en/winte...ay-snow/733545

An unusually chilly spring is about to turn even more shocking as cold air, moisture and a visit from the polar vortex team up to trigger way out-of-season conditions for mid-May across portions of the Northeast. AccuWeather meteorologists anticipate the upcoming pattern to bring freezing conditions and snow that defies the norms for so late in the season.

[k2skier112]

And then Shit For Brains will ignore this part

The weather late this week to this weekend and beyond may seem unreal and downright nasty after the warmest weekend of the season so far. After the temperature in New York City failed to climb to 70 degrees Fahrenheit during April for the first time in 80 years, since 1940, according to the National Weather Service (NWS), the high soared to 80 on Sunday.

[rideit]

I refer back to the original title of this thread...

https://www.theverge.com/21252174/he...ience-advances

[SkiCougar]

"Snowfall a month early in Argentina"

"On route 40 south the use of chains is mandatory."

https://www.iceagenow.info/snowfall-...-in-argentina/

tell those Argentinians to get in their suv's and start them up and get their "climate change" going before they are snowed in !

[zartagen]

Anything skouger posts anything about weather or climate, he needs to be reminded that he was 100% certain that hurricane harvey was going to be a dud. He maintained that position for days until he was knee deep in water.

But seriously, what is the point of finding random anecdotes supposedly disproving climate change? Does it make you feel better denying that we, as a species (well, industrialized nations), fucked up our habitat and collectively shit the bed? I don't get it. Anyway, go fucking learn about cold fronts and the jet stream. Whatever your idiotic conclusions are, flip them to the compete opposite, and then you may be closer to how shit works in real life.

[Bunion 2020]

Cougs still confuses Weather and Climate.

[Core Shot]

If you remember sctv, this is gold

[SkiCougar]

"Record cold in Slovakia last night."

Coldest May 22 in at least 69 years.
Vernar -4.3C
Kamenica and Cirochou -3.6C
Poprad -2.1, this broke cold record from 22nd May 1951

https://korzar.sme.sk/c/22409992/noc....html?ref=njct


(that's probably because they all have small European cars there, no SUVs to warm things up)

[SkiCougar]

Anything skouger posts anything about weather or climate, he needs to be reminded that he was 100% certain that hurricane harvey was going to be a dud. He maintained that position for days until he was knee deep in water.

But seriously, what is the point of finding random anecdotes supposedly disproving climate change? Does it make you feel better denying that we, as a species (well, industrialized nations), fucked up our habitat and collectively shit the bed? I don't get it. Anyway, go fucking learn about cold fronts and the jet stream. Whatever your idiotic conclusions are, flip them to the compete opposite, and then you may be closer to how shit works in real life.

you understand I mostly post in this thread just to piss people off, in fact today is the first time i had checked since my last post i did not even know there was a reply(or two) until now..

i knew my initial post in this thread "climate change" was law but for some reason ron Johnson keeps posting and you all keep replying.

keep going on with my bad hurricane prediction if it amuses you as it seems to be doing.

[k2skier112]

"Record cold in Slovakia last night."

Coldest May 22 in at least 69 years.
Vernar -4.3C
Kamenica and Cirochou -3.6C
Poprad -2.1, this broke cold record from 22nd May 1951

https://korzar.sme.sk/c/22409992/noc....html?ref=njct


(that's probably because they all have small European cars there, no SUVs to warm things up)

Any parts of the planet have a warm or hot May?

[WMD]

you understand I mostly post in this thread just to piss people off

You don't piss us off, you make us chuckle. Your posts are too ridiculously stupid to upset anybody. Thanks for the laughs!

[Core Shot]

Siberia is toast

https://www.washingtonpost.com/weath...ria-heat-wave/

40 degrees F above average