View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
pueno
Joined: 03 Mar 2007 Posts: 2807
|
Posted: Sat Sep 14, 2013 5:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
keycocker wrote: |
He will endlessly do it no matter how foolish it makes him look, perhaps just to keep pueno amused
LOL |
But, since he can't read my posts, he'll never know, will he?
. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
MalibuGuru
Joined: 11 Nov 1993 Posts: 9300
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
mac
Joined: 07 Mar 1999 Posts: 17747 Location: Berkeley, California
|
Posted: Sun Sep 15, 2013 8:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Bard--you are trying to be as funny as NW.
Quote: | ClimateDepot.com is the website of Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow employee Marc Morano, a conservative global warming denier who previously served as environmental communications director for a vocal political denier of climate change, Republican Sen. James Inhofe. Launched in spring 2009, Climate Depot claimed it would be "the Senate EPW website on steroids," and "the most comprehensive information center on climate news and the related issues of environment and energy."[1] |
Batshit crazy. Credible? Not on your life. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
nw30
Joined: 21 Dec 2008 Posts: 6485 Location: The eye of the universe, Cen. Cal. coast
|
Posted: Mon Sep 16, 2013 12:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
mac, the hysterical source slammer,,,,,, who's funny?
Be sure to jump on the sources as fast as you can, or we might think you're loosing your touch. LOL!!!
It's like whack-a-mole! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
GURGLETROUSERS
Joined: 30 Dec 2009 Posts: 2643
|
Posted: Mon Sep 16, 2013 3:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
Didn't wish to get involved again, but oh dear!
Regardless of shooting the messenger, the Mail on Sunday ran a critical two page spread detailing the conclusions of the latest leaked IPCC report, and castigated it for the questions (in some cases evidence) it ignores, or fails to answer.
The allegations are that the computer models (they admit so) have all been fundamentally flawed (the Met Office in particular) and that they have NO clear answer to the (admitted by them) 'pause' in warming, and that their future warming predictions have had to be at least halved over anything they previously claimed.
(computer - will continue.) |
|
Back to top |
|
|
GURGLETROUSERS
Joined: 30 Dec 2009 Posts: 2643
|
Posted: Mon Sep 16, 2013 3:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
One of the IPCC's reports own authors, professer Myles Allen, the director of Oxford University's Climate Research Centre, stated that 'this should be the last IPCC assessment.' He accuses the cumbersome production process of 'misrepresenting how science works!' (From the horses mouth!)
The paper contacted Judith Curry (outspoken climatologist) for her comments on their article. She ststed,'the report shows the science is in a STATE OF FLUX!'
Quite so !! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
mac
Joined: 07 Mar 1999 Posts: 17747 Location: Berkeley, California
|
Posted: Mon Sep 16, 2013 2:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Surprise me sometime Bard and use a credible source. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
MalibuGuru
Joined: 11 Nov 1993 Posts: 9300
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
nw30
Joined: 21 Dec 2008 Posts: 6485 Location: The eye of the universe, Cen. Cal. coast
|
Posted: Fri Sep 20, 2013 12:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
stevenbard wrote: | http://www.space.com/19131-sun-solar-space-weather-2013.html
Solar activity at 100 year low. Scientists worried that we may be entering a new ice age... |
Sorry Steven, but I'm sure that the teach hates that source as well. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
mac
Joined: 07 Mar 1999 Posts: 17747 Location: Berkeley, California
|
Posted: Fri Sep 20, 2013 2:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
NW and Bard--solar flares and solar activity are not the same thing as climate change or CO2 build-up in the earth's atmosphere. The level of solar activity has to do with how much energy is radiated, or more particularly, how much things like solar flares could affect transmissions.
Increased CO2 has to do with how the earth responds to the energy/heat that reaches the planet's atmosphere. If the low point in solar activity corresponded to less energy (I doubt that it matters significantly) it could explain the flattening of the temperature curve. As such, it then might be seen as further evidence for climate change. I'm sure you wouldn't have posted it if you thought that!
In terms of the physics--these are separate cycles that operate independently. Teasing out long term trends requires factoring them out without prejudicing the value of the data that you do have.
Credible source, wrong interpretation. Better than a flame though. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You cannot download files in this forum
|
|
|