It is now official. No global warming of the earth's environment in 15 years.

You are correct, Mac.

Thanks for sharing.

The far-Left is a very tyrannical group; once they gain power, they limit liberty for everyone else who does not agree with them!

"Socialists cry "Power to the people", and raise the clenched fist as they say it. We all know what they really mean — power over people, power to the State."

-- Margaret Thatcher

Socialism is great if you are willing to accept a much reduced standard of living and an oppressive central government who is always telling you what to do and how to live your life to the benefit of the state!

Cuba, North Korea and the old Soviet Union and East Germany are four perfect examples!

 

Cessna, you and your ilk can continually delude yourselves, the hard data is well known. You have been provided links by NASA and NOAA, that identify the warming.

If you had any clue of the amount of work involved, you would never show up on this forum again.

 

Your article is discredited. There is no "pause" in warming. There is no data to suggest that.

 

According to who?

A negligible rise in temperatures that does not exceed natural climate variability.

And neither is one hundred and thirty years.

 

Ah, so you're a global warming acolyte. And here I thought you were a non-conformist...

 

This BS lie again?

Show us evidence that "over 90% of scientists" believe in the AGW hypothesis.

There has been no lie (except the one you just propagated). There hasn't been any statistically significant warming since November of 1996. Your link does absolutely nothing to refute that fact.

 

The only thing that has been discredited are the liars and charlatans who have propagated one of the biggest scams in history.

You warmists are like religious extremists. No matter how much evidence of malfeasance, incompetence, and bias is produced, you still cling to this fanciful hypothesis as if it were the word of God.

BS!!!

There has been no statistically significant warming since November 1996, PERIOD.

Cease with your BS lies and distortions. Your precious AGW movement is DEAD. Move on with your life.

 

It was completely discredited. The OP claimed the met office released data that there had been no warming in 15 years and based his entire article around that. The met office released no such data and they called shenanigans on his article.

Provide evidence of your claim. Science doesn't seem to agree with you.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/22/science/earth/22warming.html


http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2010/20100728_stateoftheclimate.html

http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2011/20110112_globalstats.html

 

Mr. Michaels is a contributing author and reviewer on the UN's IPCC.

 

You are mistaken, mdrobster.

You need to analyze the data in the NASA and NOAA reports more carefully. All you have done is state a non-scientific conclusion of yours that is not correct.

The NASA report says t he average temperature around the globe in 2011 was 0.92 degrees F (0.51 C) warmer than the mid-20th century baseline.

At it turns out, the average temperature around the globe in 2007 was 0.85 degrees F (0.47 C) warmer than the mid-20th century baseline.

These differences (0.04 C) are statistically insignificant and well within the predictive accuracy of the global atmospheric models.

If you were a scientist you would easily know and perhaps understand these calculations!

Please stop pretending you understand science when you do not.

 

The Himalayas and nearby peaks have lost no ice in past 10 years, study shows

The melting of Himalayan glaciers caused controversy in 2009 when a report from the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change mistakenly stated that they would disappear by 2035, instead of 2350.

 

Ah yes Michaels. Known lacky of the oil industry (he recieves 40% of his funding from the fossil fuel industry) and known distorter of data.


http://www.skepticalscience.com/patrick-michaels-serial-deleter-of-inconvenient-data.html


Do you have any actual evidence? Not opinion pieces, but actual data and research to support your theory?

 

Cessna please, the links I provided have all the data, your politicals have clouded your sanity on this subject. Do not use a single sentence as the sole basis of your argument.

If one web searches "warmest years recored", the links and data within are reproducable. One must be able to reproduce their theory to make a scientific statement which none of your links can do.

 

I suggest you go back to the thread on that topic where they explain that concept.



That is not proof that there has been no warming since 1997.

 

Yes, but GE Closed the last light bulb plant in America and moved all production to China....

GE Closes Last Incandescent Light Bulb Plant, Jobs Sent to China

Heres the CEO of GE and Obamas Jobs Czar and Obama laughing about you not being able to find a job....

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O55aRrvXtio"]Obama: Shovel-Ready Not as Shovel-Ready as We Expected - YouTube[/ame]

 

Many climate researchers receive funding from the fossil fuel industry. Maybe if you knew the first thing about anything you'd realize that the fossil fuel industry has an incentive to understand climate variability.

And if you really think Michaels is a "distorter" and a "lackey", you might want to inform the IPCC of that fact since he is a contributing author and reviewer to their periodic climate reports.

I give you an article in Forbes written by an IPCC panelist and you respond with a known warmist blog? Hilarious...

Nothing will convince you otherwise.

 

Actually evidence will convince me otherwise. Of which you have produced zero, and I have provided links to actual science organizations. See the edit on my first post to you.

All you have produced is an opinion piece from a known fraud. Which of the incidents listed there are you disputing happened?


Thousands of scientists volunteer to be part of the IPCC, including dissenting views. Here is what one of the lead authors had to say about Michaels.

Hmmm....now back to that evidence you have somewhere....

 

Come now, mdrobster.

I gave you the correct scientific explanation and, as a non-scientist, you refuse to accept it.

No, it is you who must misinterpret the scientific data to satisfy your misguided views as a "global alarmist".

If you understood and accepted the limitations of conclusions obtained using statistical analysis you would readily realize you are wrong.

Please stop pretending you understand science when you do not.

 

We've been over this. Time and time again.

Both the AAAS and NAS issued very strongly worded positions on the subject years ago that say that there really isn't any doubt about it anymore. The AAAS statement says in part:

And that was in 2006. There is not a single professional scientific organization in the world that takes a dissenting position from this. Not one.

The American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) is the largest professional scientific association in the world, with 125,000 members. Founded in 1848, the AAAS is one of the most respected scientific organizations in the world. They are the publishers of Science, which is the most prestigious peer reviewed scientific journal in the world.

The US National Academy of Sciences (NAS) is part of the National Academies - organizations chartered by Congress to provide professional and objective recommendations in their areas of expertise. Commissioned by President Abraham Lincoln, the NAS consists of about 2,000 members who serve pro bono. New members are elected by the existing membership, and being asked to serve is considered the second greatest honor an American scientist can receive, only behind the Nobel Prize.

These are not your local save the stream organizations, these are They, as in They say. This is as definitive a statement of what science knows as it's possible to get. If what these folks have to say isn't good enough for you, nothing from science ever will be.

And in all the time we've been discussing this issue, you have never even tried to answer this very simple point. Probably because you know there isn't an answer to it. The people with the expertise to know what's really going on unanimously say that climate change is real, we're the ones doing it, it's going to be bad, and we'd better do something about it. No amount of mangled out of context statistics is ever going to change that.

You know, there have been cases of various interest groups paying people to push their talking points online. You guys suppose there's anyone like that here on Political Forum?

 

Come now, Kessy_Athena.

You are talking about reports published in 1999 and 2000 by global “alarmists” (Michael Mann, et al) who have since been shown to have "cherry picked" the scientific data and manipulated the results to support their political agenda.

I never said global warming does not exist. In fact, in my original discussion, I specifically said. "CO2 levels have continued to rise without interruption, but we now know with the release of new temperature data that the planet has not warmed for the past 15 years." That is not to say it did not warm before that time.

Moreover, the following comments are not my words. These are the exact statements by two well recognized climate study groups, The Met Office and the University of East Anglia Climatic Research Unit. I am merely the messenger. You accomplish absolutely nothing by attacking the messenger.
Instead, let's see you and the other global “alarmists” refute the words by these well- recognized groups have said. If you have evidence to the contrary, please present it. Again as I have asked before, are you going to continue to "cut bait or fish"?

"Based on readings from more than 30,000 measuring stations, the data was issued last week without fanfare by the British Met Office and the University of East Anglia Climatic Research Unit. It confirms that the rising trend in world temperatures ended in 1997."

 

The only thing keeping this scam alive is the IPCC and political interests. Well, and leftist losers.

 

Cherry picked reports from 99? What are you babbling about? I'm talking about the current official position papers from the most well respected scientific organizations in the world. Or are you saying that the AAAS and NAS have political agendas? That's like saying that the American Medical Association only said that cigarettes cause cancer because they have a political agenda against the tobacco industry.

What you are saying is that we should take no action about climate change, irregardless of what the actual facts are. Which is just plain foolish.

 

You are mistaken, Kessy_Athena.

Please do not put words in my mouth. I did not say that. What I am saying is we should not spend billions and billions of taxpayer money to solve a problem that does not exist.

Again, are you going to "fish or cut bait"? Let's see your scientific proof that global temperatures have actually increased in the last 15 years." Saying other sciences groups disagree means absolutely nothing and you know it.

If you have proof this statement by The Met Office and the University of East Anglia Climatic Research Unit is wrong, and then please present it!

 

You are indeed correct, Mac.

Check this out.

University of East Anglia emails: the most contentious quotes

Here are a selection of quotes from the emails stolen from computers at the University of East Anglia. Many involve Phil Jones, head of the university's Climatic Research Unit.

From: Kevin Trenberth (US National Center for Atmospheric Research). To: Michael Mann. Oct 12, 2009
"The fact is that we can't account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can't... Our observing system is inadequate"

Prof Trenberth appears to accept a key argument of global warming sceptics - that there is no evidence temperatures have increased over the past 10 years.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/en...nglia-emails-the-most-contentious-quotes.html

 

I already proved it was wrong. The Met Office themselves said that the article in the OP is a lie and that they never said there had been no warming in the past 15 years.

http://metofficenews.wordpress.com/2012/01/29/met-office-in-the-media-29-january-2012/


Why are you still pushing your lie?