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

[rideit]

[/OSTRICHGIF]

[k2skier112]

It takes a special kind of stupid to think that our short lifetimes and own perceptions can detect lasting changes in a constantly changing climate. Remember the guy from Iowa complaining about how bad the climate was getting when the data showed the opposite?

Besides that, not much has changed here. If global warming was a concept no one had heard of, no one here would think something unusual was happening.

shut the fuck up you ignorant cunt

this is one of your more fuct up statements ever, and that's hard to do being such a fucking moronic cunt

[SkiCougar]

80 degrees in Houston today and will hit that several times more this week. not unnormal for Houston in march; but if it knocks down the bat virus at 80 degrees or higher, i'm down with global warming; I can move north.

[ron johnson]

RJ is still here telling us the good night night fairy tales he heard at Americans For Prosperity summer camp.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

Iowa guy!

[uglymoney]

Iowa guy!

Koch brother propagandist!

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

[SB]

corona virus gonna fix it

[ex-powderbroker]

It takes a special kind of stupid to think that our short lifetimes and own perceptions can detect lasting changes in a constantly changing climate. Remember the guy from Iowa complaining about how bad the climate was getting when the data showed the opposite?

Besides that, not much has changed here. If global warming was a concept no one had heard of, no one here would think something unusual was happening.

what about the permafrost record, ice core samples, shell density, tree rings, etc?

as far as media hype, it’s really clear in the northeast, in my parents time and my childhood lakes would freeze and snow would linger for a winter. it doesn’t seem to stick around now for more than a few days.

our lives might by short but the body of evidence is pretty convincing to almost everyone. but we have a few guys in a burning building saying it’s not on fire.


just weird.

[Bunion 2020]

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/elfsted...ge-2020-03-08/

Fake news

[SB]

shit outta hand?

[stuckathuntermtn]

Hehehe

[MultiVerse]

what about the permafrost record, ice core samples, shell density, tree rings, etc?

Frauds like ron and heller and other propagandists have declared war on objective reality.

Earlier in this thread ron continuously presented Greenland's GISP2 site – in particular another fraudsters Easterbrook's misrepresentation – as a proxy to conflate Greenland with past worldwide global climate conditions. But that's not even true with Greenland as a whole. For example, another site DYE-3 in southern Greenland indicates a Holocene warming trend while sites Renland and Agassiz in central and northern Greenland show a cooling trend over similar time frames. Other sites in Greenland show warming and cooling that occurs at different times and are nonsynchronous.

And that's just Greenland in the North Atlantic. The fact is there was a lot more random spatial variability in past warming/cooling trends compared with today's warming trend but that doesn't stop them from making duplicitous assertions about the past.

What ron and cohort like to do is cherry-pick one data point and then argue there's a global conspiracy. For example, because it was once really hot in the dust bowl era Midwest deniers like to imply it was that hot everywhere even though it wasn't.

Ron’s Don Easterbrook, among others, often make novel predictions of imminent global cooling based on things like the Grand Solar Minimum, etc. and they've turned out to be wrong. Just like ron endorses conspiracy theories, ron often tacitly endorses other implausible denier theories:

And who knows what effect the coming Grand Solar Minimum will have.

There's also other data, in addition to proxies & weather stations, like barometric pressure, sea surface temperature, and sea-ice concentration. We can also now compare satellite readings to surface temperature readings which both show the same warming trend. This is what a broad cross section of data and models show:

1. Average global temperatures in the 20th century are higher than ever before in at least 2,000 years
2. A warming period is now affecting the whole planet at the same time for the first time
3. And the speed of global warming has never been as high as it is today.

[rideit]

what about the permafrost record, ice core samples, shell density, tree rings, etc?

as far as media hype, it’s really clear in the northeast, in my parents time and my childhood lakes would freeze and snow would linger for a winter. it doesn’t seem to stick around now for more than a few days.

our lives might by short but the body of evidence is pretty convincing to almost everyone. but we have a few guys in a burning building saying it’s not on fire.


just weird.

There are always a few dunning Kruger candidates that argue that water isn’t wet.
It’s just statistics.

[ron johnson]

It looks like MV has no response to my previous posts so in an effort to save face he has to go back and dig up 6 month old posts that have been discussed ad nauseam. It's truly pathetic and I'm not sure why I even bother with someone who argues in such bad faith. I take apart every post he makes point by point while he dodges and moves the discussion wherever he pleases. I'll directly call you out again:

If its not just one blog post about Heller, where are the others? How about instead of you now claiming that Heller's "so called evidence was laughable", you go back and present what is laughable about it.

Why can you not answer this question? If Heller's evidence is laughable it should be easy for you show why.

And I'll add this one:

You are claiming there are more than 25 long running sites in Australia, where is your evidence of this? There is nothing cherry picked about selecting for the longest most consistent record. If there actually are more than the 25 locations selected in Heller's graph then I'll cede the argument. Where is the graph?

You got a graph or are you just straight up lying again?

Frauds like ron and heller and other propagandists have declared war on objective reality.

Earlier in this thread ron continuously presented Greenland's GISP2 site – in particular another fraudsters Easterbrook's misrepresentation – as a proxy to conflate Greenland with past worldwide global climate conditions. But that's not even true with Greenland as a whole. For example, another site DYE-3 in southern Greenland indicates a Holocene warming trend while sites Renland and Agassiz in central and northern Greenland show a cooling trend over similar time frames. Other sites in Greenland show warming and cooling that occurs at different times and are nonsynchronous.

And that's just Greenland in the North Atlantic. The fact is there was a lot more random spatial variability in past warming/cooling trends compared with today's warming trend but that doesn't stop them from making duplicitous assertions about the past.

What ron and cohort like to do is cherry-pick one data point and then argue there's a global conspiracy. For example, because it was once really hot in the dust bowl era Midwest deniers like to imply it was that hot everywhere even though it wasn't.

Look at that Holocene warming trend at DYE-3!

Ron’s Don Easterbrook, among others, often make novel predictions of imminent global cooling based on things like the Grand Solar Minimum, etc. and they've turned out to be wrong. Just like ron endorses conspiracy theories, ron often tacitly endorses other implausible denier theories:

This is one of MV's favorite slimeball tactics - pull up old quotes out of context.

But sure, the grand solar minimum is an implausible denier theory, even NASA is in on it:
https://science.nasa.gov/science-new...imum-is-coming

There's also other data, in addition to proxies & weather stations, like barometric pressure, sea surface temperature, and sea-ice concentration. We can also now compare satellite readings to surface temperature readings which both show the same warming trend. This is what a broad cross section of data and models show:

1. Average global temperatures in the 20th century are higher than ever before in at least 2,000 years
2. A warming period is now affecting the whole planet at the same time for the first time
3. And the speed of global warming has never been as high as it is today.

MV loves parroting these three statements, but they depend entirely on two cherry picked papers that are based on the unreliable PAGES temperature reconstruction.

[ron johnson]

what about the permafrost record, ice core samples, shell density, tree rings, etc?

as far as media hype, it’s really clear in the northeast, in my parents time and my childhood lakes would freeze and snow would linger for a winter. it doesn’t seem to stick around now for more than a few days.

our lives might by short but the body of evidence is pretty convincing to almost everyone. but we have a few guys in a burning building saying it’s not on fire.


just weird.

Read the thread! No one is arguing whether it is warming or not, and like the guy in Iowa, your perception that snow doesn't seem to stick around for more than a few days is probably wrong:

https://climate.rutgers.edu/snowcove...ld&ui_season=1

[ex-powderbroker]

So it's getting warmer, you agree. But you don't think it's a problem or man made?

I Just listened to Win Smith at Sugarbush speak about climate, he had hard numbers for resurfacing days, wintry mix events, suitable snowmaking periods, and days with natural snow cover since 1971. His data was not good in the MRV.

Snowfall is doing fine over the same period including record years. The problem is warmups right after. And for ice in NYC, as the Elfstedentocht, it seems a thing of the past.

Two years ago was the first year in Montreal there was no skating on Lac Castor. It had never happened before in the history of the park going back 130 years, that it hadn't frozen satisfactorily for people to skate. How many more winters till the next one without natural ice up here?

[k2skier112]

Read the thread! No one is arguing whether it is warming or not, and like the guy in Iowa, your perception that snow doesn't seem to stick around for more than a few days is probably wrong:

https://climate.rutgers.edu/snowcove...ld&ui_season=1

ignorant fucking cunt think north america is global, what a shitstained asshole

[ron johnson]

So it's getting warmer, you agree. But you don't think it's a problem or man made?

I Just listened to Win Smith at Sugarbush speak about climate, he had hard numbers for resurfacing days, wintry mix events, suitable snowmaking periods, and days with natural snow cover since 1971. His data was not good in the MRV.

Snowfall is doing fine over the same period including record years. The problem is warmups right after. And for ice in NYC, as the Elfstedentocht, it seems a thing of the past.

Two years ago was the first year in Montreal there was no skating on Lac Castor. It had never happened before in the history of the park going back 130 years, that it hadn't frozen satisfactorily for people to skate. How many more winters till the next one without natural ice up here?

I think human activity influences climate. I don't think it's likely to be a big problem, but my opinion doesn't matter. I haven't gotten involved in this thread with the intent to proselytize my opinion. I got involved to push back on the blatant fact-less propaganda that the media pushes on this subject, and try to show people that they aren't being presented an honest picture of the global warming narrative.

Is Win's presentation online? I find it a bit hard to believe that he actually has a consistent record of that type of data given the ownership changes, snowmaking changes, skier surface demands, etc.

[ron johnson]

ignorant fucking cunt think north america is global, what a shitstained asshole

I know it might be difficult for someone showing clear signs of mental instability, but can you figure out why I might choose North America over global in this instance?

[rideit]

I think human activity influences climate. I don't think it's likely to be a big problem, but my opinion doesn't matter. I haven't gotten involved in this thread with the intent to proselytize my opinion. I got involved to push back on the blatant fact-less propaganda that the media pushes on this subject, and try to show people that they aren't being presented an honest picture of the global warming narrative.

Is Win's presentation online? I find it a bit hard to believe that he actually has a consistent record of that type of data given the ownership changes, snowmaking changes, skier surface demands, etc.

Whatever your motivations, you have failed.

[ron johnson]

Whatever your motivations, you have failed.

You were a hopeless case. How many times have I pointed out the propaganda in your NYT and WaPo articles? And yet you keep posting them.

You would think by now that everyone would have figured out that media is not to be trusted. If you want to find the truth on anything you have to do some due diligence, but for some reason climate gets a pass. Must be the 21st century religion thing....

[rideit]

Ok, tin foil boomer.
Go lick some hand railings, mmmk?
Nothing I posted has turned to be in any way wrong, and you know it.

[MultiVerse]

Whatever your motivations, you have failed.

ron's goal is to deceive. For example, in his post above he links to a NASA page about the grand solar minimum claiming "NASA is in on it." But the grand solar minimum/maximum was never the thing, we know the sun goes through roughly 11 year cycles. The denier claim is the solar cycles are what's causing global warming, not greenhouse gasses. NASA is definitely not in it.

Ron's knows this and delights in seeing if he can find any suckers who will believe him.

[MultiVerse]

So it's getting warmer, you agree. But you don't think it's a problem or man made?

I Just listened to Win Smith at Sugarbush speak about climate, he had hard numbers for resurfacing days, wintry mix events, suitable snowmaking periods, and days with natural snow cover since 1971. His data was not good in the MRV.

Snowfall is doing fine over the same period including record years. The problem is warmups right after. And for ice in NYC, as the Elfstedentocht, it seems a thing of the past.

Two years ago was the first year in Montreal there was no skating on Lac Castor. It had never happened before in the history of the park going back 130 years, that it hadn't frozen satisfactorily for people to skate. How many more winters till the next one without natural ice up here?

We should always assume ron is either lying or presenting a delimited factoid. In this case it's arguing against objective reality by saying the perception the "snow doesn't seem to stick around" is wrong. Peoples perceptions are not wrong, the snow really doesn't stick around as long.

As skiers/boarders we think of winter as the season we slide on snow. But Rutgers scientists define winter as only three months. So while we're still skiing the scientists have moved on to spring & summer and the snow is definitely not sticking around:



The snow not sticking around is a big deal and not just for skiers. Snow reflects sunlight which helps cool the planet. Less snow cover in the spring and summer causes more global warming because the days are longer so receiving more energy from the sun for longer enhances the greenhouse effect.



Counterintuitively, even some of the increasing fall/winter extent is due to warming because some places will receive more snowfall due to higher temperatures (most heavy snowfalls happen with relatively warm air) but unfortunately that snow will melt sooner.


Speaking of skating, check this out:

[MultiVerse]

Also, on the previous page ron asked if "If Heller's evidence is laughable it should be easy for you show why" and "You got a graph?"


We all found heller's evidence laughable, as laughable as his evidence there's no such thing as a greenhouse effect, and we all had a good laugh at the time. Ron should refer back to the previous discussion if he wants.

In the meantime, this is Australia's max temperature trend going back to the mid 1800s from, among others, Lawrence National Laboratory & Koch Foundation funded Berkeley Earth—further exposing the ron-heller "no warming in Australia" fraud:

[ex-powderbroker]

Thanks for finding that snowpack chart. It seems like Ron agrees that it is getting warmer but can't/doesn't want to link human behavior to it.

Here's the Protect Our Winters talk at Sugarbush with Win and the CSO (?) at Alterra in the mad river valley for anyone interested: