Setting up the Global Warming lies to come

[DC Tom]

Speaking of being precise! That's not the EPA model, its the two dork's from the right wing institute "crunching numbers" supposidly from EPA numbers. I know you are an expert in science--snerk--but learn to read what you are commenting about

 

You think the article lied about them using the EPA's model...and your mindless disbelief means I didn't read it?

 

You're being even more nonsensical than usual.

[truth on hold]

[Gary M]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2724381/Mastodon-tusks-primitive-tools-discovered-fisherman-suggest-humans-settled-North-America-thousands-years-previously-thought.html

 

""The incredible archaeological find was discovered in 230 feet of water 60 miles off shore in 1974. Fishermen who were dragging their scalloping nets across the bottom of the bay snagged a massive mastodon skull and dragged it to the surface."

 

"The Chesapeake has been underwater since the last ice age ended 14,000 years ago - meaning the tool is at least 14,000 years old."

 

So oceans have risen and receded long before the SUV, but this time it's our fault. Sorry not buying it.

[KD in CA]

So oceans have risen and receded long before the SUV, but this time it's our fault. Sorry not buying it.

 

That's the underlying idiocy you are required to believe to jump on board the Climate Change^TM bandwagon. Oh, and the belief that humans can take over Mother Nature's role of controlling the earth's natural warming/cooling cycles so everything stays just right.

[Tiberius]

You think the article lied about them using the EPA's model...and your mindless disbelief means I didn't read it?

 

You're being even more nonsensical than usual.

You trusting their "number crunching" is what's so funny. You were actuallt crediting not a second hand, but a third hand source for your "precise" analysis. LOL

[Gary M]

You trusting their "number crunching" is what's so funny. You were actuallt crediting not a second hand, but a third hand source for your "precise" analysis. LOL

 

Because the climate whiners that want to spend billions of other peoples money to fight "climate change" didn't provide the data. Likely because it doesn't fit their narrative.

[DC Tom]

You trusting their "number crunching" is what's so funny. You were actuallt crediting not a second hand, but a third hand source for your "precise" analysis. LOL

 

You're a !@#$ing idiot. I criticized the precision as artificial and meaningless.

[B-Man]

WHEN MODELS DISAGREE WITH TEMPERATURE RECORDS,

 

well, the state of knowledge must be imperfect. I like the way the model-makers say that this means the temperature records must be wrong. . . .

 

 

Models challenge temperature reconstruction of last 12,000 years

Temperature records could be skewed, or models could be missing the mark.

 

Climate records, like tree rings or ice cores, are invaluable archives of past climate, but they each reflect their local conditions. If you really want a global average for some time period, you’re going to have to combine many reliable records from around the world and do your math very carefully.

 

That’s what a group of researchers aimed to do when (as Ars covered) they used 73 records to calculate a global overview of the last 11,000 years—the warm period after the last ice age that's called the Holocene. The Holocene temperature reconstruction showed a peak about 7,000 years ago, after which the planet slowly cooled off by a little over 0.5 degrees Celsius until that trend abruptly reversed over the last 150 years. That behavior mirrored the change in Northern Hemisphere summer sunlight driven by cycles in Earth’s orbit.

 

A new study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences and led by the University of Wisconsin’s Zhengyu Liu delves into a problem with that pattern—and it’s not what climate models say should have happened.

 

More at the link

[ExiledInIllinois]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2727734/Wet-cold-bank-holiday-way-forecasters-warn-two-weeks-bad-weather-ahead.html

 

Snow in August for the UK?

 

 

[DC Tom]

WHEN MODELS DISAGREE WITH TEMPERATURE RECORDS,

 

well, the state of knowledge must be imperfect. I like the way the model-makers say that this means the temperature records must be wrong. . . .

 

 

Actually, they blame the models and the temperature.

 

And that's entirely accurate. Paleohistorical temperatures are estimated by proxy (often poorly). Models are statistical calculations of approximations of theoretical systems that can only be as good as the data they're calibrated from.

 

Models can be good investigative tools, but a poor source of conclusions.

[B-Man]

Sad that environmentalists oppose this new Green Technology:

 

Fuzzy Math Can’t Hide Shale Boom’s Green Credentials.

 

“One day, with the right technologies, we’ll be able to power society without relying on fossil fuels, but we’re not there yet. Until then, natural gas is one of our best options, and greens would do well to recognize the fracking boom for what it is: good news.”

 

 

It’s only good news if clean cheap energy is your goal.

[Tiberius]

Sad that environmentalists oppose this new Green Technology:

Fuzzy Math Can’t Hide Shale Boom’s Green Credentials.

“One day, with the right technologies, we’ll be able to power society without relying on fossil fuels, but we’re not there yet. Until then, natural gas is one of our best options, and greens would do well to recognize the fracking boom for what it is: good news.”

 

It’s only good news if clean cheap energy is your goal.

the break through institute? Wow! At least they are not denying global warming! Edited August 22, 2014 by gatorman

[/dev/null]

http://www.newsnet5.com/weather/weather-news/us-hurricane-drought-still-in-record-territory

 

But...but.but, consensus!.

[OCinBuffalo]

http://youtu.be/vGdi_pjrX4w

Noam F'ing Chomsky.

 

Really. You bring a total hack into this? Hilarious. Ole Noam is too old to do this right anymore. I will now proceed to shred his lame attempt at FUDding this issue.

 

I wonder: who else has an "institutional motive" vis a vis Global Warming?

 

Could it be the climate scientists, who have been flying 1st class, getting massive grants, and living large on Democratic party $ every since this became a "catastrophic" issue? Could it be the Democratic politicians, who have generated a once winning, now losing, political issue out of this entire discussion? Which of these people is going to stand up and say "no, I'd rather go back to making $45k a year in a field that nobody cares about/I'd rather go back to being a lawyer" when they can make millions, like Al Gore?

 

Here's my assertion, using Chomsky's logic:

"Even though Democratic politicians/climate scientists may or may not know what is actually happening with the climate, the have both an institutional(Democratic party) and a constituency issue(the usual wingnuts), that causes them to act in the short term, seeking votes, donations, grants, and noteriety, when in the long term, the economic damage they are doing to the country is quite substantial. But, they have a political agenda, and a political constituency to support, so...."

 

I couldn't help but notice that old Noam got the words "market economy" in there, as a negative. Old socialist dogs have to run their old tricks, don't they?

 

His entire argument is specious to say the least. It's time for Ole Noam to hang it up. His intellectual NFL career is over. That entire thing was laughable. I have more from that video to kick his ass with, but I'd fell bad smacking around an old man any more than is necessary.

 

Noam Chomsky: in the top ten for "worst day in a man's life, all time, in history"....when the Berlin wall fell. I bet he cried like a baby.

http://www.newsnet5....ecord-territory

 

But...but.but, consensus!.

Yes, but just you wait until the first hurricane comes!

 

Context out the window!

 

Noam Chomsky on MSNBC to tell us about the institutional responsibilities of business people, as though no climate scientist/Democratic strategist works at....a literal institution!

[/dev/null]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2738653/Stunning-satellite-images-summer-ice-cap-thicker-covers-1-7million-square-kilometres-MORE-2-years-ago-despite-Al-Gore-s-prediction-ICE-FREE-now.html

[B-Man]

 

Coming Soon to Climate Change: The “Rewind” Button?

 

As is well known—except to readers of the major media, which means most of the public—someone hit the “pause” button on global warming about 15 years back. We’ve covered some of the theories behind the pause several times here on Power Line (this post is the most recent, with links to the previous installments), including the leading theory that the “missing heat” is not missing at all, but is going into the deep ocean.

 

Never mind that climate orthodoxy told us incessantly that it was the atmosphere we could expect to warm up rapidly (settled? did you say settled?) or that the deep ocean theory was highly convenient because we lack enough data with which to validate it. It keeps the climatista camp stoves burning (so to speak), which is the important thing.

 

Some evidence to support the deep ocean hypothesis is dribbling in, such as in Sciencemagazine this week, but with the caveat that the “pause” may last another decade or longer.

More at the links:

 

 

 

Why Renewable Energy Is Hopeless

 

At Watts Up With That?, Ed Hoskins spotlights the intractable problem with solar and wind power

[/dev/null]

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-08-30/california-sets-stage-for-first-groundwater-regulations.html

 

You don't own that water. Somebody else does...

[Gary M]

I think they need to charge some one for all those emissions.

 

http://www.ijreview....ea-caught-film/

Edited September 1, 2014 by Gary M

[Nanker]

I think they need to charge some one for all those emissions.

 

http://www.ijreview....ea-caught-film/

This is one of the most effective means for the globe to cool itself. Massive volcanic eruptions directly equate to global cooling.

[truth on hold]

Noam F'ing Chomsky.

 

Really. You bring a total hack into this? Hilarious. Ole Noam is too old to do this right anymore. I will now proceed to shred his lame attempt at FUDding this issue.

 

I wonder: who else has an "institutional motive" vis a vis Global Warming?

 

Could it be the climate scientists, who have been flying 1st class, getting massive grants, and living large on Democratic party $ every since this became a "catastrophic" issue? Could it be the Democratic politicians, who have generated a once winning, now losing, political issue out of this entire discussion? Which of these people is going to stand up and say "no, I'd rather go back to making $45k a year in a field that nobody cares about/I'd rather go back to being a lawyer" when they can make millions, like Al Gore?

 

Here's my assertion, using Chomsky's logic:

"Even though Democratic politicians/climate scientists may or may not know what is actually happening with the climate, the have both an institutional(Democratic party) and a constituency issue(the usual wingnuts), that causes them to act in the short term, seeking votes, donations, grants, and noteriety, when in the long term, the economic damage they are doing to the country is quite substantial. But, they have a political agenda, and a political constituency to support, so...."

 

I couldn't help but notice that old Noam got the words "market economy" in there, as a negative. Old socialist dogs have to run their old tricks, don't they?

 

His entire argument is specious to say the least. It's time for Ole Noam to hang it up. His intellectual NFL career is over. That entire thing was laughable. I have more from that video to kick his ass with, but I'd fell bad smacking around an old man any more than is necessary.

 

Noam Chomsky: in the top ten for "worst day in a man's life, all time, in history"....when the Berlin wall fell. I bet he cried like a baby.

 

Yes, but just you wait until the first hurricane comes!

 

Context out the window!

 

Noam Chomsky on MSNBC to tell us about the institutional responsibilities of business people, as though no climate scientist/Democratic strategist works at....a literal institution!

lol what a mindless rant. The science behind global warming is about as controversial in the scientific community as the "theory" the sun is the center of the solar system.