robbzilla
Well-Known Member
800 A.D. thru 1000 A.D. Come on Mr. Buck can't you read?name them.
800 A.D. thru 1000 A.D. Come on Mr. Buck can't you read?name them.
Doesn't it take a lot of time to break messages up like that
so you can respond to each little part?
I would think
there are better ways to spend your valuable time
Mr. Buck
Was it good/how much did you pay? I'm always curios to hear about other people's adventures in to the unkownno.
still no.
but that would give you a headache.
don't worry, i already paid your mother for sex.
i saw no rebuttal in there.
800 A.D. thru 1000 A.D. Come on Mr. Buck can't you read?
That doesn't look credible.
Get the fuck out of here about "blinded by ignorance". We disagree and I'm not calling you ignorant. We don't know each other, so how can you make this claim? In fact, I relish the idea of having an intelligent discussion on this. @Bugeye opened up a great discussion with me and I was convinced by his argument that a lot of surface temperature data taken on the ocean is not as accurate as it might seem. So again, fuck about that ignorant stuff and let's talk.It's funny how all your graphs start in the 1900's. Here are some that support my side of the argument.
View attachment 3632960
View attachment 3632962
View attachment 3632961
So as you can see graphs can support both sides of the argument, but really you just need to open your eyes and stop being blinded by ignorance. As you can see, there have been hotter years in the past. The problem is when you look at something with horse blinders on you end up having an intellectual blind spot, it's not your fault though you've just been listening to what you've been told
I still don't get your point. The graph you attached clearly shows a warming trend.That doesn't look credible. Here a good one that absolutely proves you wrong Mr. Buck:
View attachment 3632980
That doesn't look credible. Here a good one that absolutely proves you wrong Mr. Buck:
View attachment 3632980
We'll see. The problem with all of this is there is so much hash out there that you have to check the source. Some of it has been refuted and retracted (especially from Spencer) yet it lives on in the Internet and people keep using it.Who's proving the point for whom with that graph?
Last year and the year before were hot too and not El Nino. So, do we just discard everything because nino one year?El Niño year, hot hot hot.
We'll see. The problem with all of this is there is so much hash out there that you have to check the source. Some of it has been refuted and retracted (especially from Spencer) yet it lives on in the Internet and people keep using it.
Last year and the year before were hot too and not El Nino. So, do we just discard everything because nino one year?
Same strategy by the same people that brought us delays in the scientific understanding of health problems with cigarettes and asbestos. Also same people that delayed action on CFC's (Freon) and are now muddying waters about second hand smoke health issues. Same "think tank" is putting out the same deceptive pseudoscienc on AGW....which of course was the point all along, to muddy the waters for those with an agenda that doesn't square with the truth.
No, we keep plotting the data so the good people at NOAA can stay employed reconfiguring it for us.Last year and the year before were hot too and not El Nino. So, do we just discard everything because nino one year?
Largest El Nino event on record too. Multiple sources about this. I'll cite Aljazeera just to annoy the Muslim bigots.This winter has been shockingly unseasonably warm. If the trend continues we'll have a hot spring and a record breaking hot summer.
Since that will skew the averages, will we see the apologists deny the weather report?
Hey wait a minute. How many of you anti climate change types own stock in coal, gas or other fossil fuel bared industries?
This should be telling; if they say they own lots, there's your motive. If they say they own none, then why are they shilling for someone else's fortune at the expense of their own and their children's? Why suck Koch so hard if you don't own stock?
No, we keep plotting the data so the good people at NOAA can stay employed reconfiguring it for us.
El Niño is the obvious reason for the significant January and February spikes.
this year had the largest el nino ever recorded. When data from multiple sources and multiple models indicate an approaching and avoidable calamity, how can we not pay attention to it?No, we keep plotting the data so the good people at NOAA can stay employed reconfiguring it for us.
El Niño is the obvious reason for the significant January and February spikes.
this year had the largest el nino ever recorded. When data from multiple sources and multiple models indicate an approaching and avoidable calamity, how can we not pay attention to it?