"Forced to admit" what? My point is clear to everyone but you.
10 years ago it was warmer than today despite massive increases in Carbon Output. The fact that that particular year was "An anomoly" has no bearing, you guys "claim" Carbon forces warming, so where is it?

Again, 2006 & 2007 were some of the coldest years on record... go through the LITANY of links proving the cooling trend that I'm talking about, DESPITE Massive increases in Carbon.

Fool, WHAT about this don't you get!!!!

__________________
http://www.nosocialism.com
-----------------------------------------------
America is not a Socialist country, this is why the only democrats who ever win, are democrats who SOUND like Republicans (Hello Bill Clinton - "Low taxes, Free Trade, Welfare Reform, Era of Big Government Over" - Sounds Republican - Hello Barrack Obama - "My Tax Cut is Bigger than yours, Your Health Care Plan is Big Government, Parents need to take responsibility for their kids schooling]").

Oh, and ONE MORE THING, if you go to NOAA's website, and do a trend line for 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000 or 2001 it will STILL show a Cooling trend through 2008 (you need at least 8 years for it to show a trend line. So I have absolutely NO Idea what you're talking about. Facts are facts and you simply can't lie your way out of that.

And if you're going to accuse me of something, at least spell it right, fraudulant = fraudulent and psuedo-science = pseudo-science.

__________________
http://www.nosocialism.com
-----------------------------------------------
America is not a Socialist country, this is why the only democrats who ever win, are democrats who SOUND like Republicans (Hello Bill Clinton - "Low taxes, Free Trade, Welfare Reform, Era of Big Government Over" - Sounds Republican - Hello Barrack Obama - "My Tax Cut is Bigger than yours, Your Health Care Plan is Big Government, Parents need to take responsibility for their kids schooling]").

Exposed Once Again With Spin And Political Scientific Data Marketing.

Why do you insert a linear regressional trend line through a data spread spanning for over 100 years ago?

Well the first 70 odd years of data which has cooling periods and minimal warming effects dampens what has happened over the past 40 odd years - WHICH IS WHY YOU PRESENT THE DATA LIKE THAT.

WHAT IS THE INCREASE IN GLOBAL TEMPERATURE OVER THE PAST 40 YEARS? IS IT 0.09F PER DECADE?

The last 3 decades has seen an increase of 0.6 degrees Celsius in global temperature. Thats about 0.2 degC/decade, which is over 6 times HIGHER than the value you present in your spin GRAPH!

The graph also uses the wider spread of data to push the already compressed trend line closer to the horizontal axis so as to gove the impression that the increase is meaningless etc.

GOOD TRY but you need to actually be honest in this debate. Try your propaganda on others

YOU ARE CAUGHT OUT AGAIN AS A SPIN MARKETING AGENT FOR THE FOSSIL FUEL INDUSTRY.

Keep posting your funny humerous graphs that are designed to confuse the public and make them feel that the increase in global temperature is very small.

Where's the exposition, everything I've shown is pure fact. You're just spouting nonsense, with nothing to back it up.

As I've said before,

Wooohoooo, I WIN!

__________________
http://www.nosocialism.com
-----------------------------------------------
America is not a Socialist country, this is why the only democrats who ever win, are democrats who SOUND like Republicans (Hello Bill Clinton - "Low taxes, Free Trade, Welfare Reform, Era of Big Government Over" - Sounds Republican - Hello Barrack Obama - "My Tax Cut is Bigger than yours, Your Health Care Plan is Big Government, Parents need to take responsibility for their kids schooling]").

What is the increase in global temperature over the past few decades - FROM YOUR OWN DATA?

IS it 0.09 deg F per decade as you say? NO!

Why dont you go back 100,000 years and draw a straight line through the data?

You are obviously a propagandist who is trying to confuse the public or doesnt understand the science or mathematical methods used in science.

First you got exposed with your 1998 psuedo science claim of global cooling.

Now your 0.09F per decade claim has been exposed.

You have become a laughing stock in here.

I am embarrassed in even responding to your posts and propaganda.

Keep it up - I can use a laugh sometimes

Why dont you look at the number of people killed per decade by automoblies on the roads.???

Look at data going back to say 1910 and draw a straight line through that and get a very small value - JUST SO THAT YOU CAN DAMPEN THE DATA OVER THE PAST 30 years.

The value becomes meaningless and missleading.

EXPOSED AND TOTALLY KNOCKED OUT - I am finished with you - BEGONE, WEAK SPIN DOCTOR - use your garbage on others

No, you notice when their argument is out of gas, they always resort to personal insults and sarcasm?

__________________

"Government is like a baby. An alimentary canal with a big appetite at one end and no sense of responsibility at the other." - Ronald Reagan

I don't see anyone laughing.
That Data is not MY data, it's NOAA's Data, and if you plug in the same numbers you get the same data. HELLO!?!?!
Try using that spongy thing between your ears, it tends to help.

Again, I WIN!!!
Wooohooo, Mods you can lock up this thread, there's nothing left to say!

__________________
http://www.nosocialism.com
-----------------------------------------------
America is not a Socialist country, this is why the only democrats who ever win, are democrats who SOUND like Republicans (Hello Bill Clinton - "Low taxes, Free Trade, Welfare Reform, Era of Big Government Over" - Sounds Republican - Hello Barrack Obama - "My Tax Cut is Bigger than yours, Your Health Care Plan is Big Government, Parents need to take responsibility for their kids schooling]").

I seriously Doubt that he even went to NOAA's site, these guys are like Robots, they don't bother to take a subjective approach to ANYTHING, they approach everything with preconceived notions, and if it doesn't fit neatly into their little BOX, they throw the baby out with the bath water.

I mean he's sitting there talking about that i put 100K years in there? The Chart CLEARLY shows and I've explained that it's Jan. 1895 to Jan. 2008, I didn't put the dammed trend line in there, the Computer did, and first he said that I'm showing too short of a time period (a Decade), and so instead I showed a Century, but now he's complaining about that. He can't make up his (*)(*)(*)(*)ing mind about what numbers he wants to see.

the Fool is obviously a lost cause, unless of course, he's just a 10 year old that's bought into all these "Green" cartoons out there.. Yeah that's probably it. He's a 10 year old.

__________________
http://www.nosocialism.com
-----------------------------------------------
America is not a Socialist country, this is why the only democrats who ever win, are democrats who SOUND like Republicans (Hello Bill Clinton - "Low taxes, Free Trade, Welfare Reform, Era of Big Government Over" - Sounds Republican - Hello Barrack Obama - "My Tax Cut is Bigger than yours, Your Health Care Plan is Big Government, Parents need to take responsibility for their kids schooling]").

So you accept the analysis that the global increase in temperature is only 0.09F per decade for the past few decades?

Do you like the way the slope of the libe is applied for the past 120 years so that you can hide the fact that the global temperature has been increasing at a rate of about 0.2 degC per decade over the past 30 years.??

Do you also agree with the EXPOSED 1998 spin doctoring of data to suggest a cooling period over the past decade?

Are you sure that you are a professor? A professor of what?

EXPOSED AGAIN AS AGENTS OF THE FOSSIL FUEL SPIN DOCTORING INDUSTRY