2014 hottest year on record

cowman said:
Wow, when I left here this morning we were talking about science and the climate... now it's guns and drugs.

Thread really went downhill.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I was going to apologize for this, then I went back to see where it went sideways. I got to #42 and quickly realized who shyte in the punchbowl.
 
LDJones said:
Do you miss points like that often? :dunno: The relevant quotes came from the e-mails themselves.
Click to expand...

You MUST understand, the message is not what that particular poster wanted to read, so that PROVES he;s a fraud, and an idiot, just like all of us that ask the same questions.

The religion of the left is partly funded by the scam of mmgw. Anything that differs from the mantra is apostasy.
 
steingar said:
So far, 2014 is shaping up to be the hottest year since temperature record keeping began, according to NOAA.
Click to expand...

Not to try and get this thread back on to it's originally misguided rails but...

They may want to wait another month and factor in Nov./Dec. before making such declarations....we could swing the other way:

Record-setting cold in November:
http://www.weather.com/storms/winter/news/november-2014-cold-snow-records-us

Coldest winter in a century destined for UK:
http://www.express.co.uk/news/nature/540842/Weather-forecast-winter-bitter-freeze-UK
 
LDJones said:
Not to try and get this thread back on to it's originally misguided rails but...

They may want to wait another month and factor in Nov./Dec. before making such declarations....we could swing the other way:

Record-setting cold in November:
http://www.weather.com/storms/winter/news/november-2014-cold-snow-records-us

Coldest winter in a century destined for UK:
http://www.express.co.uk/news/nature/540842/Weather-forecast-winter-bitter-freeze-UK
Click to expand...

You are ruining a perfectly good misleading headline and BS story. Knock it off. :nono:
 
LDJones said:
They may want to wait another month and factor in Nov./Dec. before making such declarations....we could swing the other way:

Record-setting cold in November:
http://www.weather.com/storms/winter/news/november-2014-cold-snow-records-us

Coldest winter in a century destined for UK:
http://www.express.co.uk/news/nature/540842/Weather-forecast-winter-bitter-freeze-UK
Click to expand...

Possible, but not terribly likely. We might have a bad winter (though it certainly isn't shaping up like it) but folks in South America might have a hot summer. It averages out. although you are correct. 2014 might not break any records. It will be one of the hottest, however.

Four pages of diatribe for a post about air temperature. Dang, I'm good.
 
ChrisK said:
Let me write this down.

You are FOR weed?

;)
Click to expand...
Can you parse my sentence and explain to me how you came up with that conclusion? (yes, I see the "wink").
To make it clear to others who might not understand, I stand behind the States right to make such laws. I don't think it is within the purview of the Federal Government to enact and enforce such laws.

That has nothing to do with my personal opinion that marijuana should be legalized on a par with alcohol, even if I don't or wouldn't use it regardless.
 
Skyscraper said:
I'm totally in favor of states rights. If the states weren't all dependent on each other there would be little need, if any for federal law at all if you ask me, but since we are a union, the fed gov is a necessity, even if it can often be an evil one.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Of course there is a legitimate and practical need for the Federal Government. But that doesn't give them the moral authority to micro-manage our lives on a daily basis.
 
JOhnH said:
Can you parse my sentence and explain to me how you came up with that conclusion? (yes, I see the "wink").
To make it clear to others who might not understand, I stand behind the States right to make such laws. I don't think it is within the purview of the Federal Government to enact and enforce such laws.

That has nothing to do with my personal opinion that marijuana should be legalized on a par with alcohol, even if I don't or wouldn't use it regardless.
Click to expand...
Obviously I was being ridiculous. My wife tells me occasionally that she is interested in legalized pot. I tell her "not in my house", but I have no problem with drinking. Neither of us would tolerate cigarette smoking in the house either (we are both ex smokers), so the fascination with marijuana does not make much sense to me.

On a personal level it is about how I was raised. I was raised to feel that alcohol was ok, smoking was tolerable, and weed was bad, and I have retained these opinions.

From a legal perspective, I think we should allow adults to kill themselves however they like as long as they do not put myself or my family in an unreasonable amount of danger. Drive under the influence, lose your license and your car. Get obnoxioisly drunk or stoned and don't drive? Whatever.
 
Last edited:
Oh, Dawg...

attachment.php
 
ChrisK said:
Obviously My wife tells me occasionally that she is interested in legalized pot. I tell her "not in my house", but I have no problem with drinking.
Click to expand...

I'll give you this buddy -- you got some kind of balls if you tell your wife no pot in your house. Yup - big brass ones. ;)
 
docmirror said:
I'll give you this buddy -- you got some kind of balls if you tell your wife no pot in your house. Yup - big brass ones. ;)
Click to expand...
She ignores me. I also said I didn't want a second dog. It showed up the next day.

Joking and hyoerbole aside, we try not to **** each other off.
 
CharlieTango said:
How is it that after 18 years with no warming we hear that it is currently the hottest year on record, year after year?
Click to expand...

And in the same year where earlier we had sensational headlines about how much colder the winter was this year.

Not to mention the unusually small number of hurricanes this year (usually thrive on higher temps).
 
Fearless Tower said:
Exactly. That's modern science. I can cherry pick whatever data I want to make the test result come out the way I want it to.
Click to expand...

And that's what the climate scientists are doing. They know who signs their paycheck and they manipulate the data accordingly.
 
Norman said:
And that's what the climate scientists are doing. They know who signs their paycheck and they manipulate the data accordingly.
Click to expand...

And.....................

Demand and receive billions in grants to conduct "further" studies....:mad2::mad2:..

Those people are professionals at milking the system...:yes:.......:mad:
 
steingar said:
Possible, but not terribly likely. We might have a bad winter (though it certainly isn't shaping up like it) but folks in South America might have a hot summer. It averages out. although you are correct. 2014 might not break any records. It will be one of the hottest, however.

Four pages of diatribe for a post about air temperature. Dang, I'm good.
Click to expand...

And you weren't even accurate, suggesting NOAA as the source when it was really a bunch of U.N. Bureaucrats! Well-played troll post!
 
LDJones said:
And you weren't even accurate, suggesting NOAA as the source when it was really a bunch of U.N. Bureaucrats! Well-played troll post!
Click to expand...
It wasn't too far off though. According to this article in Scientific American, the data for the WMO report comes from NOAA, NASA, and the UK Met Office.

Care to claim that the data was made up by bureaucrats? That will be harder to make stick.
 
azure said:
It wasn't too far off though. According to this article in Scientific American, the data for the WMO report comes from NOAA, NASA, and the UK Met Office.

Care to claim that the data was made up by bureaucrats? That will be harder to make stick.
Click to expand...

We know the land-based records have been hopelessly corrupted. Remember the climategate emails where the guy was bemoaning having to make crap up?

I have much more faith in the satellite measurements.
 
azure said:
It wasn't too far off though. According to this article in Scientific American, the data for the WMO report comes from NOAA, NASA, and the UK Met Office.

Care to claim that the data was made up by bureaucrats? That will be harder to make stick.
Click to expand...

Oops, nice try, and a common method of trying to sneak one by. Here's the exact quote, with emphasis: The report uses data from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, NASA and the United Kingdom's Met Office.

So, that's like saying I use data(English characters) from porn sites to make up this post. Of course, the conclusions and massaging of that raw data isn't published. I'm sure there was plenty of extrapolation, interpretation, plot graphing, and interpolation of the actual data, which we don't get to see.

You think we haven't seen this shyte before? You think anyone with an independent thought believes anything like this? Jeez.

Here's the key statement from that link: This year's report was released during the U.N. climate talks in Lima, Peru, where diplomats are negotiating a new global climate deal to be signed in Paris next year.

Now, let me explain what a climate deal will look like. The western civ nations which developed so much for the third world will be targeted to pay the third world for being so advanced. It's like being punished for success. We should all be third-world shyteholes like Peru, or Iran, or Namibia.

Fools, not gonna take it anymore.
 
LDJones said:
We know the land-based records have been hopelessly corrupted. Remember the climategate emails where the guy was bemoaning having to make crap up?

I have much more faith in the satellite measurements.
Click to expand...

Who controls the SATs? :nono:
 
LDJones said:
We know the land-based records have been hopelessly corrupted. Remember the climategate emails where the guy was bemoaning having to make crap up?

I have much more faith in the satellite measurements.
Click to expand...
Climategate? Bad example. The emails were thoroughly investigated on several fronts and no breach of scientific integrity was found.

"Climategate" is actually a very good example of how media coverage of controversial allegations tends to focus on the initial allegations, less so on the outcome of the investigations of those allegations, especially when they're shown to be false. Oh, they report it, but the spectacular stuff is considered "breaking news" and makes the front page/top of the hour, while the later followup ends up somewhere that is more easily ignored - especially by people with an axe to grind.
 
Last edited:
docmirror said:
Oops, nice try, and a common method of trying to sneak one by. Here's the exact quote, with emphasis: The report uses data from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, NASA and the United Kingdom's Met Office.
Click to expand...
And that differs from what I wrote how? :dunno:

The rest of your post isn't worth a considered reply. Comparing data from scientific organizations (who BTW endorse the scientific consensus) to PORN sites? Like I hinted earlier, this thread has gone into tinfoil hat territory. Believe however you want, it's a free country.
 
LDJones said:
We know the land-based records have been hopelessly corrupted. Remember the climategate emails where the guy was bemoaning having to make crap up?

I have much more faith in the satellite measurements.
Click to expand...

" we" know that for sure? Possibly you know this but 85 percent of professionals who study it disagree. Core samples, which are taken constantly at both poles by people of known integrity, indicate a gradual warming as do photographs of places like Greenland , etc. where glaciers are much much smaller than say 20 years ago. Its proven fact however , that corporations who stand to benefit large amounts by denial , are constantly broadcasting to the unwashed masses that there's nothing to worry about. Currently, in China , in the larger city's one needs to wear a mask when outside. Used to be like this in L.A. Or close to it before stringent regs. Were put in place.
 
azure said:
And that differs from what I wrote how? :dunno:

The rest of your post isn't worth a considered reply. Comparing data from scientific organizations (who BTW endorse the scientific consensus) to PORN sites? Like I hinted earlier, this thread has gone into tinfoil hat territory. Believe however you want, it's a free country.
Click to expand...

What I believe isn't important. What's been proven is that climate charlatans have been flushed from NOAA, NASA before, and the old 'hockey stick' stuff holds no scientific scrutiny. The pols in Peru are just going to take one side of the debate because that's the side that will get them paid billions of dollars.

You want to believe when they are feeding you crap and calling it a tootsie roll, go ahead. I've got my own mind, and use to be critical of anything. When a climate schlub says 'the science is closed on this' you know they are weak, and hurting. When they have to sell their snake oil to pols to get funding, you know it's a giant ponzi scheme.

If you don't like my replies to your shyte, put me on ignore. It'll do us both good so I don't have to waste time with your drivel.
 
Love when people invoke Greenland. It might have actually been green a mere 1,000 years ago when the Vikings were romping about, during a particularly warm spell caused by I dunno witches I guess.
 
WOW!!! 114 posts of gibberish.(mine included)

Our lovely Earth will compensate with us here or not.

YOU cannot control it...WE AS A WHOLE cannot control it....

WATCH THE MOVIE FROZEN(not to be confused with GW)...LET IT GO...LET IT GO....!!!
 
docmirror said:
What I believe isn't important. What's been proven is that climate charlatans have been flushed from NOAA, NASA before, and the old 'hockey stick' stuff holds no scientific scrutiny. The pols in Peru are just going to take one side of the debate because that's the side that will get them paid billions of dollars.
Click to expand...
Do you have a reference on that? Hint: one case of scientific fraud does not invalidate multiple lines of evidence researched by a community of hundreds of investigators.
 
ClimbnSink said:
Love when people invoke Greenland. It might have actually been green a mere 1,000 years ago when the Vikings were romping about, during a particularly warm spell caused by I dunno witches I guess.
Click to expand...
It was a particularly warm spell for northern Europe and the north Atlantic, but IIRC global temperatures weren't significantly warmer than before or afterward, and were in fact cooler than during the last half century.
 
LDJones said:
We know the land-based records have been hopelessly corrupted.
Click to expand...
If you're referring to the heat island effect, then this page might be of interest. Just a brief excerpt...

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).
Click to expand...

*Other, as in other than due to limited coverage of temperature measurements.
 
azure said:
Do you have a reference on that? Hint: one case of scientific fraud does not invalidate multiple lines of evidence researched by a community of hundreds of investigators.
Click to expand...

Feeding from the trough of public ignorance. :mad2::mad2:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top