Why is It SO COLD in the US Southwest? Did All the CO2 Just Go Away?

Glad you liked my chart and the inclusion of clouds as greenhouse gases

Sorry that the actual properties of those gases are really in the realms of physics since it is the alteration of radiation that is the real problem - but then I guess someone who mistakes depiction of radiation as "wind".......................

Still avoiding discussing TIPPING POINTS

 

Bullcrap. Neither were as hot as it was in the 1930's. 1934 is the hottest year on record in the US. I'm sure that is was even HOTTER many times in the 1800,'s and earlier, as well.

 

By all means, provide the CHEMICAL PROOF of the "tipping point" of CO, in ppm of an atmospheric mix. The Warmists NOW claim, that it is NOT 350ppm, but, somehow IS 385ppm.

"Discussing" unsubtantiated speculation is how pseudo-scientists arrive at "consensus", instead of PROOF.

Let's see the VERIFIABLE, REPEATABLE results, established via SCIENTIFIC METHOD...not a "pretty chart" of arbitrary parameters.

 

There is no such thing as 'actual real world scientific proof', there is only 'scientific theory' (like evolution, relativity or gravity, for example)-which, by the way, has a very different connotation to the word 'theory' which we use outside of scientific discussion.

 

Oh really? Who told you that crock of bullcrap? Let me guess...was it a "paleo-psychologist"?

Iron oxide is RUST= PROVEN SCIENTIFIC FACT.

Water is H2O= PROVEN SCIENTIFIC FACT

Peniccillin kills the pathogens it is effective against, by rupturing their cell walls when they try to reproduce=PROVEN SCINETIFIC FACT

Fire is OXIDATION= PROVEN SCIENTIFIC FACT

Sulphuric acid is H2SO4= PROVEN SCIENTIFIC FACT, etc., ad nauseum.

Thanks for , yet another, of your glaringly clear illustrations of the COMPLETE SCIENTIFIC IGNORANCE of the Left in general, Warmists in particular.

it;s always worth a good laugh....


Come on, now post the OP-ED from the biggest PHONY "scientist" (Karl Popper?) in the world,and his asinine claims ( which you, naturally , shovel down your piehole with both hands) about science not being able to "prove" anything....

 

1934 is in fourth place. Try fact checking first.

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/news/ncdc-announces-warmest-year-record-contiguous-us

 

You made the thread and it featured your own claims, to which you have been shifting the burden of proof continuously. You claimed the "record" cold in the SW disproved global warming.

Now, since you apparently think records are meaningless, which is your way of escaping having to address the record warm 2012 as it won't fit into your argument.

So if your premise is only the warmest claims, then why did you bring up the record cold SW, that's what YOU brought up; no warmest brought that up.

 

Until the Warmist got BUSTED "fudging the numbers"...again.


http://wattsupwiththat.com/2007/08/08/1998-no-longer-the-hottest-year-on-record-in-usa/


Try to keep up....

 

Reading comprehension troubles ,as usual we see.

I said no such thing. I posted a sarcastic OP, referring the obvious idiocy of Warmist claims about current levels of CO2,and have been hammering that, since page 1.

The planet has been warming since the end of the last Great Ice Age, about 12,000 years ago, or so. It has NOTHING to do WITH MANKIND, or current, CO2 levels.

Duh....

I think you actually ENJOY the public pimp slappings....seriously...

 

So it was a strawman thread. Ok.. Nvm.. I'll find a better GW thread to post in. One with an actual point to it.

 

2012 was the warmest year in CONUS recorded history, and you disprove that with a homepage from 2007 that shot down numbers that wouldn't be arrived at until the future.... LMAO.. Ask the webmaster if I can borrow his time machine.

 

And don't forget the Carbon Tax

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/01/28/a-14-trillion-extortion-for-a-global-warming-scam/

 

Grok's just trying to distract from the fact that models are an accepted method used in science. The mass of the electron was determined without any experiments to measure the mass. The The heating characteristics of CO2 can be determined using the RTE and related equations. No direct experiment necessary. Even skeptics like Christy, Lindsen and Spencer accept these facts.
To anyone following the science of AGW, that GHGs warm the atmosphere is no longer being debated by any climatologists including the skeptics. The debate, among climatologists, is the feedback factor. Skeptics claim the feedback is negative or zero and the mainstream claim that the feedback is positive. So any rants by Grok have no basis in science; they are just the rants of an anonymous internet poster who thinks he knows more than the climatologists who actually have degrees in science.

It is amusing watching Grok jumping up and exposing his lack of understanding. It reminds me of a 5 year old trying to get attention because no one wants to play with him.

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...right-warming--deniers-now.html#axzz2Jh5eRs63

 

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204301404577171531838421366.html

 

[video=youtube_share;78j5KgG1ncI]http://youtu.be/78j5KgG1ncI[/video]

 

And your point is????

 

Well, maybe..let's wait and see...your source was still citing 1998 as the PREVIOUS "hottest" year in the US, which, is, as I have demonstrated, complete horsesqueeze, so I'm not blindly accepting their claims,as you so willingly do.

With all the temp stations in artifically hot locations, etc., I'll wait until the educated skeptics have a chance to examine the EMPIRICAL DATA, before I accept that claim.



Was 2012 the Hottest Year On Record In the US?

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2013/01/was-2012-the-hottest-year-on-record-in-the-us.php


As we see, there are ALREADY MAJOR HOLES in the Warmist claims about 2012, not the least of which is the FACT that the DATA HAS BEEN MANIPULATED....

Meanwhile , the HOTTEST RECORDED TEMP RECORD still stands...and it's long before the 90's...

 

No, I'm not. I am CORRECTLY pointing out:

A.) that NO model matches ACTUAL testing/experimentaiton in establishing SCIENTIFIC FACT

B.) And that primitive equations, are based ENTIRELY on ASSUMED. ARBITRARY parameters, while MATHEMATICAL models, are based on KNOWN, EXISTING AND PROVEN. numeric relaitonships. The mass of an electron was determined with previously determined known data.

Learn the difference.

You just cannot seem to get your mind around those OBVIOUS FACTS....

 

The variables in the RTE are based on known, existing and "proven" numeric relationships. That's why I posted the equations. Just because you do not understand the equation ("non-established value of "d"." ) does not mean the equations are not mathematical models.

 

They are nothing more than the PRIMITIVE EQUATIONS, devised to "create" data, from contrived , arbitrary parameters.

You do not know what "d" is, DO YOU?

The mass of an electron was determined by MEASURING A KNOWN MAGNETIC CHARGE NEEDED TO MOVE IT AROUND A CATHODE TUBE.

There is NO SUCH ESTABLISHED, VERIFIABLE CONSTANT (control) in your primitive equations, which you do not understand to save your life....

 

Sorry but what on this earth, the next or even the outer solar system do you mean by "provide the chemical proof"

That is like asking someone selling Ice cream to provide the knitting pattern for the cone!

http://www.cosmosmagazine.com/news/5881/climate-change-tipping-point-55-million-year-old-lessons