"global warming petition project" peer reviewed and everything???

Padawanbater2

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
jahbrudda said:
The article was quoting the Met Office, but i suppose in your mind, they're hacks too.
Here it is, straight from them.

The recent pause in warming


July 2013 - Global mean surface temperatures rose rapidly from the 1970s, but have been relatively flat over the most recent 15 years to 2013. This has prompted speculation that human induced global warming is no longer happening, or at least will be much smaller than predicted.http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/research/news/recent-pause-in-warming
Click to expand...
"The Met Office Hadley Centre has written three reports that address the recent pause in global warming and seek to answer the following questions:

What have been the recent trends in other indicators of climate over this period?
What are the potential drivers of the current pause?
How does the recent pause affect our projections of future climate?
The first paper shows that a wide range of observed climate indicators continue to show changes that are consistent with a globally warming world, and our understanding of how the climate system works.


The second suggests that it is not possible to explain the recent lack of surface warming solely by reductions in the total energy received by the planet, i.e. the balance between the total solar energy entering the system and the thermal energy leaving it. Changes in the exchange of heat between the upper and deep ocean appear to have caused at least part of the pause in surface warming, and observations suggest that the Pacific Ocean may play a key role.


The final paper shows that the recent pause in global surface temperature rise does not materially alter the risks of substantial warming of the Earth by the end of this century. Nor does it invalidate the fundamental physics of global warming, the scientific basis of climate models and their estimates of climate sensitivity."

LOL!!

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-26084625
 
jahbrudda

jahbrudda

Well-Known Member
Padawanbater2 said:
"The Met Office Hadley Centre has written three reports that address the recent pause in global warming and seek to answer the following questions:

What have been the recent trends in other indicators of climate over this period?
What are the potential drivers of the current pause?
How does the recent pause affect our projections of future climate?
The first paper shows that a wide range of observed climate indicators continue to show changes that are consistent with a globally warming world, and our understanding of how the climate system works.


The second suggests that it is not possible to explain the recent lack of surface warming solely by reductions in the total energy received by the planet, i.e. the balance between the total solar energy entering the system and the thermal energy leaving it. Changes in the exchange of heat between the upper and deep ocean appear to have caused at least part of the pause in surface warming, and observations suggest that the Pacific Ocean may play a key role.


The final paper shows that the recent pause in global surface temperature rise does not materially alter the risks of substantial warming of the Earth by the end of this century. Nor does it invalidate the fundamental physics of global warming, the scientific basis of climate models and their estimates of climate sensitivity."

LOL!!

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-26084625
Click to expand...
I give up Mr pada, even with scientific evidence, you keep on denying the truth.
It's like trying to get a retard to quit smiling.
Good day.
 
Doer

Doer

Well-Known Member
Well, the AR5 will be released next year, and it will admit the solar forcing of temps has been sady underestimated and account for most the warming seen, not man.

Yeah, the Sun makes it hotter and the Sun makes it cooler. So, if you would stop spitting like cats you could observe with me how the IPCC is backing down and equvicating more and more with each draft.

Such as:

Replace the sentence "These factors combined with incomplete models in Antarctic ice sheet mass loss result in low confidence in scientific understanding, and attribution of the mass balance of Antarctica to human influence is premature. " with "Due to a low level of scientific understanding there is low confidence in attributing the causes of the observed loss of mass from the Antarctic ice sheet since 1993."

change "very high confidence" to "high confidence"

delete 'strongly'

delete last sentence that starts with, "It is about as likely as not..." and replace with, "By the end of the 21st century, about half of the models infer emissions slightly above zero, while the other half infer a net removal of CO2 from the atmosphere."
https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar5/wg1/docs/review/WG1AR5_SubstantiveEditsList_All_Final.pdf


It is chock full of this stuff. Put out a first report with enough smuggge to make a splash and give the power idiots some cover and then begin revisions. But, the govts spend the money regardless.
 
MuyLocoNC

MuyLocoNC

Well-Known Member
UncleBuck said:


as you can see, the conspiracy theorists over at naturalnews have it totally correct. whenever CO2 goes up, temps go down.

as you can clearly see.

:dunce:

good job, jahbeenthere.
Click to expand...
And as EVERYONE with two good eyes can see from your graph, temperature increases precede CO2 increases. Just like they ALWAYS have until Fat Al decided to reverse them for the purpose of duping a bunch of ignoramuses out of their cash.

It's almost like increasing temperatures raise CO2 levels, not vice versa.
 
Padawanbater2

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
MuyLocoNC said:
And as EVERYONE with two good eyes can see from your graph, temperature increases precede CO2 increases. Just like they ALWAYS have until Fat Al decided to reverse them for the purpose of duping a bunch of ignoramuses out of their cash.

It's almost like increasing temperatures raise CO2 levels, not vice versa.
Click to expand...
This is basic science.. Grade school shit

I remember doing the CO2 experiment in 6th grade science class
 
twostrokenut

twostrokenut

Well-Known Member
Padawanbater2 said:
This is basic science.. Grade school shit

I remember doing the CO2 experiment in 6th grade science class
Click to expand...
Was it a public school?
We should cut carbon credits from the budget for the experiment.
Classes should be silent....less co2.
No more volcanos.
We shall use the net tax savings to give rich retirees basically free golf carts
and solar panels.
Possibly finance ngo's as well.
Brilliant because there's no proof and we control more economy
and make more regulations that cost money to create as well.
Soon we will have to admit there never was any money....then they will see the light bearer but still not know what created the stolen fire.
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
twostrokenut said:
Was it a public school?
We should cut carbon credits from the budget for the experiment.
Classes should be silent....less co2.
No more volcanos.
We shall use the net tax savings to give rich retirees basically free golf carts
and solar panels.
Possibly finance ngo's as well.
Brilliant because there's no proof and we control more economy
and make more regulations that cost money to create as well.
Soon we will have to admit there never was any money....then they will see the light bearer but still not know what created the stolen fire.
Click to expand...
oh, i get it now.

the federal reserve spent decades paying off scientists who secretly invented thermometers (with fluoride!) to give tax breaks for solar panels, thereby enslaving the john birch society via the homosexual agenda replete with liberation theology.

thank goodness super intelligent folks like yourself are here to expose the HOAX with your big brains.
 
Padawanbater2

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
twostrokenut said:
Was it a public school?
We should cut carbon credits from the budget for the experiment.
Classes should be silent....less co2.
No more volcanos.
We shall use the net tax savings to give rich retirees basically free golf carts
and solar panels.
Possibly finance ngo's as well.
Brilliant because there's no proof and we control more economy
and make more regulations that cost money to create as well.
Soon we will have to admit there never was any money....then they will see the light bearer but still not know what created the stolen fire.
Click to expand...
 
twostrokenut

twostrokenut

Well-Known Member
The fed just loans legal tender....the ones acting as fiduciary and collateralizing
lawful money assets to borrow legal tender at interest are the crooks and conspirators.
They are the ones that chartered it and are charged with maintaining the value thereof.

Try be less tarded.
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
twostrokenut said:
The fed just loans legal tender....the ones acting as fiduciary and collateralizing
lawful money assets to borrow legal tender at interest are the crooks and conspirators.
They are the ones that chartered it and are charged with maintaining the value thereof.

Try be less tarded.
Click to expand...
all these goddamn federal laws letting us keep more of our money if we install solar panels or energy efficient appliances are such a bummer. i feel like they should pass an amendment protecting me from these tax breaks. that's freedom because liberty. constitution. fluoride.
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
twostrokenut said:
Now that's funny. How much do unconstitutional wars cost again?
Oh wait, you paid for the war in the middle east with your energy star
rated hid grow lights.
Riiiiiiiiiight.
Click to expand...
are you hopped up on meth? because your thoughts are going from right field to left field in no time flat.

you talk about the constitution, and then you talk about wars which haven't been declared in many decades.

you talk about energy efficient grow lights which i never claimed existed, and you flip how tax credits for smart investments that will save you money work.

caught me by surprise since i half expected you to go on a 16th amendment rant based on what part of my post you chose to quote.

i might just be high on cat piss fumes from several years ago still, but i am having trouble keeping up with all of your crazy diversions and conspiracy theories and meth talk.
 
twostrokenut

twostrokenut

Well-Known Member
Meth?
No, gt dragon; yes.
Perfect hybrid....has that early harv green crack pheno too....45 days.
Green crack and sour d stand out on this one...afgooey and blueberry hinted in the background.


Last edited 2:32 am

Says it right on the post.
Yet all three of your last edited "quotes" are later.
 
MuyLocoNC

MuyLocoNC

Well-Known Member
Padawanbater2 said:
This is basic science.. Grade school shit

I remember doing the CO2 experiment in 6th grade science class
Click to expand...
Im sorry, let me say it again slower. Did you notice that temperature increases precede CO2 increases, not vice versa?

Your entire movement is based on CO2 preceding temperature increases.

Remember way, way back in the good 'ol days of 2012, when they destroyed the popular opinion (used by every pro MMGW climatologist as an assumption) that CO2 preceded temperature increases? Ice cores showed CO2 increases trailed temperature increases by about 100-200 years. In fact, one could expect increased CO2 levels since the warming trend started in the 1800's on every graph you Eco-Loons post.

Man and all his emissions could have disappeared in a runaway plague 200 years ago and the temperatures and CO2 levels would be EXACTLY where they are today and are going to be in a century.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top