Its the hottest day in Hobart since records have been taken and one of the hottest in Adelaide....yep the planet is cooling just like the deniers said it would  ;D

adelcrow wrote on Jan 4^th, 2013 at 6:18pm:

Its the hottest day in Hobart since records have been taken and one of the hottest in Adelaide....yep the planet is cooling just like the deniers said it would  ;D

not even close to the hottest in adelaide. in fact, it has been a very mild summer and BELOW average temperatures. you get one day that is hot and you come up with this crap.

gold_medal wrote on Jan 4^th, 2013 at 6:45pm:

adelcrow wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 6:18pm: Its the hottest day in Hobart since records have been taken and one of the hottest in Adelaide....yep the planet is cooling just like the deniers said it would  ;D not even close to the hottest in adelaide. in fact, it has been a very mild summer and BELOW average temperatures. you get one day that is hot and you come up with this crap.

Yep.  When it's convenient for their "argument", AGW alarmists will use local weather in place of world climate every time.

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 4^th, 2013 at 6:47pm:

gold_medal wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 6:45pm: adelcrow wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 6:18pm: Its the hottest day in Hobart since records have been taken and one of the hottest in Adelaide....yep the planet is cooling just like the deniers said it would  ;D not even close to the hottest in adelaide. in fact, it has been a very mild summer and BELOW average temperatures. you get one day that is hot and you come up with this crap. Yep.  When it's convenient for their "argument", AGW alarmists will use local weather in place of world climate every time.

the last 4 or 5 years in adelaide have been rela;tively cool. we get 2 or 3 40+ days and then the rest are 20s. Gone are the dayss of 35+ for weeks on end

that GW does seem to be suspiciously absent yet again.

adelcrow wrote on Jan 4^th, 2013 at 6:18pm:

Its the hottest day in Hobart since records have been taken and one of the hottest in Adelaide....yep the planet is cooling just like the deniers said it would  ;D

Yep, a whole 0.1 C hotter...( 40.9 C..and the previous was 40.8 in 1976)....

Funny thing about this anthropogenic doomsday cult "weather is now climate" when convenient, is that the heat is from a lack of h2o in its cooling form, due to the position of the highs and lows over Australia. Dont you just love clouds negative feedback.

Co2 doesnt even get a look in.

gold_medal wrote on Jan 4^th, 2013 at 6:49pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 6:47pm: gold_medal wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 6:45pm: adelcrow wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 6:18pm: Its the hottest day in Hobart since records have been taken and one of the hottest in Adelaide....yep the planet is cooling just like the deniers said it would  ;D not even close to the hottest in adelaide. in fact, it has been a very mild summer and BELOW average temperatures. you get one day that is hot and you come up with this crap. Yep.  When it's convenient for their "argument", AGW alarmists will use local weather in place of world climate every time. the last 4 or 5 years in adelaide have been rela;tively cool. we get 2 or 3 40+ days and then the rest are 20s. Gone are the dayss of 35+ for weeks on end that GW does seem to be suspiciously absent yet again.

According to UAH, half of Australia was -0.2 to -0.4 cooler than norm in 2012.

gold_medal wrote on Jan 4^th, 2013 at 6:45pm:

adelcrow wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 6:18pm: Its the hottest day in Hobart since records have been taken and one of the hottest in Adelaide....yep the planet is cooling just like the deniers said it would  ;D not even close to the hottest in adelaide. in fact, it has been a very mild summer and BELOW average temperatures. you get one day that is hot and you come up with this crap.

wow..we had a cold week in the middle of winter and you claimed it was proof that the earth was cooling..well bugga me sideways  ;D

progressiveslol wrote on Jan 4^th, 2013 at 7:32pm:

gold_medal wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 6:49pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 6:47pm: gold_medal wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 6:45pm: adelcrow wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 6:18pm: Its the hottest day in Hobart since records have been taken and one of the hottest in Adelaide....yep the planet is cooling just like the deniers said it would  ;D not even close to the hottest in adelaide. in fact, it has been a very mild summer and BELOW average temperatures. you get one day that is hot and you come up with this crap. Yep.  When it's convenient for their "argument", AGW alarmists will use local weather in place of world climate every time. the last 4 or 5 years in adelaide have been rela;tively cool. we get 2 or 3 40+ days and then the rest are 20s. Gone are the dayss of 35+ for weeks on end that GW does seem to be suspiciously absent yet again. According to UAH, Australia was -0.2 to -0.4 cooler than norm in 2012.

Heading for the hottest summer on record..you lost again  ;D

gizmo_2655 wrote on Jan 4^th, 2013 at 7:17pm:

adelcrow wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 6:18pm: Its the hottest day in Hobart since records have been taken and one of the hottest in Adelaide....yep the planet is cooling just like the deniers said it would  ;D Yep, a whole 0.1 C hotter...( 40.9 C..and the previous was 40.8 in 1976)....

So the earth isnt on a cooling trend..thanks for admitting it  :D

adelcrow wrote on Jan 4^th, 2013 at 7:34pm:

progressiveslol wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 7:32pm: gold_medal wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 6:49pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 6:47pm: gold_medal wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 6:45pm: adelcrow wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 6:18pm: Its the hottest day in Hobart since records have been taken and one of the hottest in Adelaide....yep the planet is cooling just like the deniers said it would  ;D not even close to the hottest in adelaide. in fact, it has been a very mild summer and BELOW average temperatures. you get one day that is hot and you come up with this crap. Yep.  When it's convenient for their "argument", AGW alarmists will use local weather in place of world climate every time. the last 4 or 5 years in adelaide have been rela;tively cool. we get 2 or 3 40+ days and then the rest are 20s. Gone are the dayss of 35+ for weeks on end that GW does seem to be suspiciously absent yet again. According to UAH, Australia was -0.2 to -0.4 cooler than norm in 2012. Heading for the hottest summer on record..you lost again  ;D

May be so, but you dont win either, because it is due to the monsoon trough being abnormally high and away from the top end of Australia. Co2 does not get a look in. Ohhhh  :'( h2o wins.

gold_medal wrote on Jan 4^th, 2013 at 6:49pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 6:47pm: gold_medal wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 6:45pm: adelcrow wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 6:18pm: Its the hottest day in Hobart since records have been taken and one of the hottest in Adelaide....yep the planet is cooling just like the deniers said it would  ;D not even close to the hottest in adelaide. in fact, it has been a very mild summer and BELOW average temperatures. you get one day that is hot and you come up with this crap. Yep.  When it's convenient for their "argument", AGW alarmists will use local weather in place of world climate every time. the last 4 or 5 years in adelaide have been rela;tively cool. we get 2 or 3 40+ days and then the rest are 20s. Gone are the dayss of 35+ for weeks on end that GW does seem to be suspiciously absent yet again.

http://climatecommission.gov.au/wp-content/uploads/SA-temperature-increase-graph.jpg

It looks like SA got rather hot 5 years ago. Those temperatures look above trend so I wouldn't be surprised if it temporarily dropped back a bit. Not that we can infer anything from just one location. Much better to look at what's happening across the whole planet from one decade to the next.

http://cloudfront.mediamatters.org/static/images/item/warmestdecade.jpg

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 4^th, 2013 at 6:47pm:

gold_medal wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 6:45pm: adelcrow wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 6:18pm: Its the hottest day in Hobart since records have been taken and one of the hottest in Adelaide....yep the planet is cooling just like the deniers said it would  ;D not even close to the hottest in adelaide. in fact, it has been a very mild summer and BELOW average temperatures. you get one day that is hot and you come up with this crap. Yep.  When it's convenient for their "argument", AGW alarmists will use local weather in place of world climate every time.

Who is using local weather in place of world climate every time Greggery?

The world climate is also increasing.  That is the point.
That is what has been predicted for decades.  That is what is happening.

What don't you understand?

gizmo_2655 wrote on Jan 4^th, 2013 at 7:17pm:

adelcrow wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 6:18pm: Its the hottest day in Hobart since records have been taken and one of the hottest in Adelaide....yep the planet is cooling just like the deniers said it would  ;D Yep, a whole 0.1 C hotter...( 40.9 C..and the previous was 40.8 in 1976)....

According to BoM it was actually 41.8c @ 04:05pm, which is definitely a bit warm for those Taswegians.
http://www.bom.gov.au/tas/observations/hobart.shtml

gold_medal wrote on Jan 4^th, 2013 at 6:49pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 6:47pm: gold_medal wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 6:45pm: adelcrow wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 6:18pm: Its the hottest day in Hobart since records have been taken and one of the hottest in Adelaide....yep the planet is cooling just like the deniers said it would  ;D not even close to the hottest in adelaide. in fact, it has been a very mild summer and BELOW average temperatures. you get one day that is hot and you come up with this crap. Yep.  When it's convenient for their "argument", AGW alarmists will use local weather in place of world climate every time. the last 4 or 5 years in adelaide have been rela;tively cool. we get 2 or 3 40+ days and then the rest are 20s. Gone are the dayss of 35+ for weeks on end that GW does seem to be suspiciously absent yet again.

Well, maybe Adelaide hasn't yet had the pleasure, BUT that doesn't mean those long, hot days are gone.

Oh no, I know they haven't gone, because we just went thru a week or so of 35c+ in Perth!

And, it was heaps of fun?

rabbitoh07 wrote on Jan 4^th, 2013 at 8:28pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 6:47pm: gold_medal wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 6:45pm: adelcrow wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 6:18pm: Its the hottest day in Hobart since records have been taken and one of the hottest in Adelaide....yep the planet is cooling just like the deniers said it would  ;D not even close to the hottest in adelaide. in fact, it has been a very mild summer and BELOW average temperatures. you get one day that is hot and you come up with this crap. Yep.  When it's convenient for their "argument", AGW alarmists will use local weather in place of world climate every time. Who is using local weather in place of world climate every time Greggery? The world climate is also increasing.  That is the point. That is what has been predicted for decades.  That is what is happening. What don't you understand?

I dont understand how you cant read a weather map and how you dont know the consequences of highs, lack of h2o and a monsoon trough that is far from its normal position.

I do like playing the weather is climate game though (bit of oneupmanship fun), cant let the doomsday cult have the game to themselves. You will not know what snow is like, ever again lol

perceptions_now wrote on Jan 4^th, 2013 at 8:35pm:

gold_medal wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 6:49pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 6:47pm: gold_medal wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 6:45pm: adelcrow wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 6:18pm: Its the hottest day in Hobart since records have been taken and one of the hottest in Adelaide....yep the planet is cooling just like the deniers said it would  ;D not even close to the hottest in adelaide. in fact, it has been a very mild summer and BELOW average temperatures. you get one day that is hot and you come up with this crap. Yep.  When it's convenient for their "argument", AGW alarmists will use local weather in place of world climate every time. the last 4 or 5 years in adelaide have been rela;tively cool. we get 2 or 3 40+ days and then the rest are 20s. Gone are the dayss of 35+ for weeks on end that GW does seem to be suspiciously absent yet again. Well, maybe Adelaide hasn't yet had the pleasure, BUT that doesn't mean those long, hot days are gone. Oh no, I know they haven't gone, because we just went thru a week or so of 35c+ in Perth! And, it was heaps of fun?

Dont be a pussy. How would you like a 1920's climate.

Most consecutive days above 37.8 °C - 160 days; Marble Bar, Western Australia from 31 October 1923 to 7 April 1924.

progressiveslol wrote on Jan 4^th, 2013 at 8:54pm:

rabbitoh07 wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 8:28pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 6:47pm: gold_medal wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 6:45pm: adelcrow wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 6:18pm: Its the hottest day in Hobart since records have been taken and one of the hottest in Adelaide....yep the planet is cooling just like the deniers said it would  ;D not even close to the hottest in adelaide. in fact, it has been a very mild summer and BELOW average temperatures. you get one day that is hot and you come up with this crap. Yep.  When it's convenient for their "argument", AGW alarmists will use local weather in place of world climate every time. Who is using local weather in place of world climate every time Greggery? The world climate is also increasing.  That is the point. That is what has been predicted for decades.  That is what is happening. What don't you understand? I dont understand how you cant read a weather map and how you dont know the consequences of highs, lack of h2o and a monsoon trough that is far from its normal position. I do like playing the weather is climate game though (bit of oneupmanship fun), cant let the doomsday cult have the game to themselves. You will not know what snow is like, ever again lol

What does reading a weather map have to do with the simple fact that the planet's temperature is increasing?  The increase in global temperature over recent decades is clear and unambiguous.

Greggery seems to be trying to deny the bleeding obvious.  Are you trying to do the same?

progressiveslol wrote on Jan 4^th, 2013 at 9:10pm:

perceptions_now wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 8:35pm: gold_medal wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 6:49pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 6:47pm: gold_medal wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 6:45pm: adelcrow wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 6:18pm: Its the hottest day in Hobart since records have been taken and one of the hottest in Adelaide....yep the planet is cooling just like the deniers said it would  ;D not even close to the hottest in adelaide. in fact, it has been a very mild summer and BELOW average temperatures. you get one day that is hot and you come up with this crap. Yep.  When it's convenient for their "argument", AGW alarmists will use local weather in place of world climate every time. the last 4 or 5 years in adelaide have been rela;tively cool. we get 2 or 3 40+ days and then the rest are 20s. Gone are the dayss of 35+ for weeks on end that GW does seem to be suspiciously absent yet again. Well, maybe Adelaide hasn't yet had the pleasure, BUT that doesn't mean those long, hot days are gone. Oh no, I know they haven't gone, because we just went thru a week or so of 35c+ in Perth! And, it was heaps of fun? Dont be a pussy. How would you like a 1920's climate. Most consecutive days above 37.8 °C - 160 days; Marble Bar, Western Australia from 31 October 1923 to 7 April 1924.

THe 1920s was not the the hottest decade ever recorded.

THe current decade is.

Stop living in denial.

Anthropogenic global warming is not going away.  The least we can do is try to minimise it.  The contribution of ignorant fools such as yourself is not really necessary.

rabbitoh07 wrote on Jan 4^th, 2013 at 10:03pm:

progressiveslol wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 8:54pm: rabbitoh07 wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 8:28pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 6:47pm: gold_medal wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 6:45pm: adelcrow wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 6:18pm: Its the hottest day in Hobart since records have been taken and one of the hottest in Adelaide....yep the planet is cooling just like the deniers said it would  ;D not even close to the hottest in adelaide. in fact, it has been a very mild summer and BELOW average temperatures. you get one day that is hot and you come up with this crap. Yep.  When it's convenient for their "argument", AGW alarmists will use local weather in place of world climate every time. Who is using local weather in place of world climate every time Greggery? The world climate is also increasing.  That is the point. That is what has been predicted for decades.  That is what is happening. What don't you understand? I dont understand how you cant read a weather map and how you dont know the consequences of highs, lack of h2o and a monsoon trough that is far from its normal position. I do like playing the weather is climate game though (bit of oneupmanship fun), cant let the doomsday cult have the game to themselves. You will not know what snow is like, ever again lol What does reading a weather map have to do with the simple fact that the planet's temperature is increasing?  The increase in global temperature over recent decades is clear and unambiguous. Greggery seems to be trying to deny the bleeding obvious.  Are you trying to do the same?

Shame you dont know what you are talking about. There has been a pause in warming for 16 years, meaning no increase in warming.

Looks like you are the one denying the bleeding obvious.

rabbitoh07 wrote on Jan 4^th, 2013 at 10:06pm:

progressiveslol wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 9:10pm: perceptions_now wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 8:35pm: gold_medal wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 6:49pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 6:47pm: gold_medal wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 6:45pm: adelcrow wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 6:18pm: Its the hottest day in Hobart since records have been taken and one of the hottest in Adelaide....yep the planet is cooling just like the deniers said it would  ;D not even close to the hottest in adelaide. in fact, it has been a very mild summer and BELOW average temperatures. you get one day that is hot and you come up with this crap. Yep.  When it's convenient for their "argument", AGW alarmists will use local weather in place of world climate every time. the last 4 or 5 years in adelaide have been rela;tively cool. we get 2 or 3 40+ days and then the rest are 20s. Gone are the dayss of 35+ for weeks on end that GW does seem to be suspiciously absent yet again. Well, maybe Adelaide hasn't yet had the pleasure, BUT that doesn't mean those long, hot days are gone. Oh no, I know they haven't gone, because we just went thru a week or so of 35c+ in Perth! And, it was heaps of fun? Dont be a pussy. How would you like a 1920's climate. Most consecutive days above 37.8 °C - 160 days; Marble Bar, Western Australia from 31 October 1923 to 7 April 1924. THe 1920s was not the the hottest decade ever recorded. THe current decade is. Stop living in denial. Anthropogenic global warming is not going away.  The least we can do is try to minimise it.  The contribution of ignorant fools such as yourself is not really necessary.

Short term yes it has been warm. No co2 correlation. No doomsday except within the cult.

Global warming hysterics believe that weather only came about in the 1800's when they started taking measurements, before that there was no weather, so to a normal person with a scientific mind today's Hobart weather would be regarded as a once in a 100 year event, so it has likely happened hundreds of times before but to a global warming hysteric that has no grasp on reality it has only happened once in 4 billion years, I hope this helps.  ;)

Rabbit,

Quote:

THe 1920s was not the the hottest decade ever recorded. THe current decade is. Stop living in denial. Anthropogenic global warming is not going away.  The least we can do is try to minimise it.  The contribution of ignorant fools such as yourself is not really necessary.

Hear hear Rabbit,
- mankind thinks it can pour billions of tons of stinking coal into the air & nothing bad will happen.

Bobby. wrote on Jan 4^th, 2013 at 10:52pm:

Rabbit, Quote: THe 1920s was not the the hottest decade ever recorded. THe current decade is. Stop living in denial. Anthropogenic global warming is not going away.  The least we can do is try to minimise it.  The contribution of ignorant fools such as yourself is not really necessary. Hear hear Rabbit, - mankind thinks it can pour billions of tons of stinking coal into the air & nothing bad will happen.

......yes and they think they can stop the sun coming up with a carbon tax  ;D

Swagman,

Quote:

......yes and they think they can stop the sun coming up with a carbon tax

Don't be so facetious.
It' all about encouraging re-newable energy:
solar
solar thermal
geo thermal    etc

Bobby. wrote on Jan 4^th, 2013 at 11:16pm:

Swagman, [quote] Don't be so facetious. It' all about encouraging re-newable energy: solar solar thermal geo thermal    etc

LOL, do you really belive that  ;D

Innocent bystander wrote on Jan 4^th, 2013 at 11:30pm:

Bobby. wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 11:16pm: Swagman, [quote] Don't be so facetious. It' all about encouraging re-newable energy: solar solar thermal geo thermal    etc LOL, do you really belive that  ;D

so who doesn't benefit from non base-load renewable sunlight energy ??

adelcrow wrote on Jan 4^th, 2013 at 7:35pm:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 7:17pm: adelcrow wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 6:18pm: Its the hottest day in Hobart since records have been taken and one of the hottest in Adelaide....yep the planet is cooling just like the deniers said it would  ;D Yep, a whole 0.1 C hotter...( 40.9 C..and the previous was 40.8 in 1976).... So the earth isnt on a cooling trend..thanks for admitting it  :D

Nope, that's not what I meant...0.1 is well within the margin for error of instrumentation..

Not to mention the whacking great bushfire, burning around Hobart, which also contributed...

progressiveslol wrote on Jan 4^th, 2013 at 10:25pm:

Short term yes it has been warm. No co2 correlation.

Much as I hate to admit it progs is right.

You can't blame a single weather event on global warming (and that goes for both sides).

The cause of this heatwave is the lack of cloud over the Australian interior and north winds bringing that heat to the southern areas.

I know that it is tempting to point score. Every time there is a cold snap in America or Europe the warming deniers start similar threads and write sarcastic letters to the murdoch press. But threads like these do nothing for the debate.

rabbitoh07 wrote on Jan 4^th, 2013 at 8:28pm:

What don't you understand?

Why so many people are absolutely terrified by a hypothesis that has no credible, reliable evidence.

I've told you this before.  Do you have a bad memory bunny boy?

rabbitoh07 wrote on Jan 4^th, 2013 at 10:03pm:

Greggery seems to be trying to deny the bleeding obvious.

Link?  Explanation?

You're not making silly assumptions again, are you bunny boy?

gizmo_2655 wrote on Jan 5^th, 2013 at 2:07am:

adelcrow wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 7:35pm: gizmo_2655 wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 7:17pm: adelcrow wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 6:18pm: Its the hottest day in Hobart since records have been taken and one of the hottest in Adelaide....yep the planet is cooling just like the deniers said it would  ;D Yep, a whole 0.1 C hotter...( 40.9 C..and the previous was 40.8 in 1976).... So the earth isnt on a cooling trend..thanks for admitting it  :D Nope, that's not what I meant...0.1 is well within the margin for error of instrumentation.. Not to mention the whacking great bushfire, burning around Hobart, which also contributed...

You may have missed the following post?
The official temperature, was actually 41.8c, which means that it was a full 1.0c higher than the previous record, NOT just 0.1c.


perceptions_now wrote on Jan 4^th, 2013 at 8:31pm:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 7:17pm: adelcrow wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 6:18pm: Its the hottest day in Hobart since records have been taken and one of the hottest in Adelaide....yep the planet is cooling just like the deniers said it would  ;D Yep, a whole 0.1 C hotter...( 40.9 C..and the previous was 40.8 in 1976).... According to BoM it was actually 41.8c @ 04:05pm, which is definitely a bit warm for those Taswegians. http://www.bom.gov.au/tas/observations/hobart.shtml

perceptions_now wrote on Jan 4^th, 2013 at 8:35pm:

gold_medal wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 6:49pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 6:47pm: gold_medal wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 6:45pm: adelcrow wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 6:18pm: Its the hottest day in Hobart since records have been taken and one of the hottest in Adelaide....yep the planet is cooling just like the deniers said it would  ;D not even close to the hottest in adelaide. in fact, it has been a very mild summer and BELOW average temperatures. you get one day that is hot and you come up with this crap. Yep.  When it's convenient for their "argument", AGW alarmists will use local weather in place of world climate every time. the last 4 or 5 years in adelaide have been rela;tively cool. we get 2 or 3 40+ days and then the rest are 20s. Gone are the dayss of 35+ for weeks on end that GW does seem to be suspiciously absent yet again. Well, maybe Adelaide hasn't yet had the pleasure, BUT that doesn't mean those long, hot days are gone. Oh no, I know they haven't gone, because we just went thru a week or so of 35c+ in Perth! And, it was heaps of fun?

and was it 'unprecedented' or merely more of the usual for Perth?

rabbitoh07 wrote on Jan 4^th, 2013 at 10:03pm:

progressiveslol wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 8:54pm: rabbitoh07 wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 8:28pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 6:47pm: gold_medal wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 6:45pm: adelcrow wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 6:18pm: Its the hottest day in Hobart since records have been taken and one of the hottest in Adelaide....yep the planet is cooling just like the deniers said it would  ;D not even close to the hottest in adelaide. in fact, it has been a very mild summer and BELOW average temperatures. you get one day that is hot and you come up with this crap. Yep.  When it's convenient for their "argument", AGW alarmists will use local weather in place of world climate every time. Who is using local weather in place of world climate every time Greggery? The world climate is also increasing.  That is the point. That is what has been predicted for decades.  That is what is happening. What don't you understand? I dont understand how you cant read a weather map and how you dont know the consequences of highs, lack of h2o and a monsoon trough that is far from its normal position. I do like playing the weather is climate game though (bit of oneupmanship fun), cant let the doomsday cult have the game to themselves. You will not know what snow is like, ever again lol What does reading a weather map have to do with the simple fact that the planet's temperature is increasing?  The increase in global temperature over recent decades is clear and unambiguous. Greggery seems to be trying to deny the bleeding obvious.  Are you trying to do the same?

the problem with yoru statement is that it is fundamentally untrue. even the CRU adn IPCC admit that there has been no statistically significant warming for the past 16 years - soon to be 17.

Innocent bystander wrote on Jan 4^th, 2013 at 10:42pm:

Global warming hysterics believe that weather only came about in the 1800's when they started taking measurements, before that there was no weather, so to a normal person with a scientific mind today's Hobart weather would be regarded as a once in a 100 year event, so it has likely happened hundreds of times before but to a global warming hysteric that has no grasp on reality it has only happened once in 4 billion years, I hope this helps.  ;)

1000 years ago Greenland was colonised and Vikings sailed NORTH of the island. Temperatures were 3-4 degrees warmer than currently. makes a mockery of the current alarmism.

The_Barnacle wrote on Jan 5^th, 2013 at 10:04am:

progressiveslol wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 10:25pm: Short term yes it has been warm. No co2 correlation. Much as I hate to admit it progs is right. You can't blame a single weather event on global warming (and that goes for both sides). The cause of this heatwave is the lack of cloud over the Australian interior and north winds bringing that heat to the southern areas. I know that it is tempting to point score. Every time there is a cold snap in America or Europe the warming deniers start similar threads and write sarcastic letters to the murdoch press. But threads like these do nothing for the debate.

the difference is that Europe has literally record cold and then a year later places like IPCC say that it was the warmest winter ever and other such nonsense. weather is just weather, but when people start to lie about it so blatantly, you start to question everything else they say.

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 5^th, 2013 at 10:20am:

rabbitoh07 wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 8:28pm: What don't you understand? Why so many people are absolutely terrified by a hypothesis that has no credible, reliable evidence. I've told you this before.  Do you have a bad memory bunny boy?

The evidence is clear to see, if you choose to see it.

Human activities of 7 billion people are releasing CO2 into the atmosphere.    FACT

Levels of CO2 in the atmosphere are rising.   FACT

CO2 is a greenhouse gas which absorbs heat.   FACT

The worlds temperatures are rising as evidenced by receding glaciers, polar ice melt and human observations.    FACT

If you follow this chain of facts you can see that human activities are warming the planet.

The_Barnacle wrote on Jan 5^th, 2013 at 10:04am:

progressiveslol wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 10:25pm: Short term yes it has been warm. No co2 correlation. Much as I hate to admit it progs is right. You can't blame a single weather event on global warming (and that goes for both sides). The cause of this heatwave is the lack of cloud over the Australian interior and north winds bringing that heat to the southern areas. I know that it is tempting to point score. Every time there is a cold snap in America or Europe the warming deniers start similar threads and write sarcastic letters to the murdoch press. But threads like these do nothing for the debate.

Add to that the jet stream which is keeping pretty low underneath Australia. Usually it will flick up into Australia or break out into 2 streams. That and the monsoon trough are working together to make sure we get burnt.

The_Barnacle wrote on Jan 5^th, 2013 at 10:57am:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 5th, 2013 at 10:20am: rabbitoh07 wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 8:28pm: What don't you understand? Why so many people are absolutely terrified by a hypothesis that has no credible, reliable evidence. I've told you this before.  Do you have a bad memory bunny boy? The evidence is clear to see, if you choose to see it. Human activities of 7 billion people are releasing CO2 into the atmosphere.    FACT but a circular argument Levels of CO2 in the atmosphere are rising.   FACT pity temperature is not CO2 is a greenhouse gas which absorbs heat.   FACT so are all gases. CO@ is one of the least greenhouse gases. water vapour is far more potent The worlds temperatures are rising as evidenced by receding glaciers, polar ice melt and human observations.    FACT actually glaciers have stopped recending, antarctica is increasine ice levela dn arctic has a underwater volcano. PLUS temperatures have not increased in 16 years If you follow this chain of facts you can see that human activities are warming the planet. the chain of 'facts' is actully very thin. there is no direct proof that humans are responsible for waring. it is just a hypothesis that remains to be proven or disproven.

Longy,

Quote:

actually glaciers have stopped recending, antarctica is increasine ice levela dn arctic has a underwater volcano. PLUS temperatures have not increased in 16 years

Why can't you use the spell check tab?

gold_medal wrote on Jan 5^th, 2013 at 10:50am:

rabbitoh07 wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 10:03pm: progressiveslol wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 8:54pm: rabbitoh07 wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 8:28pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 6:47pm: gold_medal wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 6:45pm: adelcrow wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 6:18pm: Its the hottest day in Hobart since records have been taken and one of the hottest in Adelaide....yep the planet is cooling just like the deniers said it would  ;D not even close to the hottest in adelaide. in fact, it has been a very mild summer and BELOW average temperatures. you get one day that is hot and you come up with this crap. Yep.  When it's convenient for their "argument", AGW alarmists will use local weather in place of world climate every time. Who is using local weather in place of world climate every time Greggery? The world climate is also increasing.  That is the point. That is what has been predicted for decades.  That is what is happening. What don't you understand? I dont understand how you cant read a weather map and how you dont know the consequences of highs, lack of h2o and a monsoon trough that is far from its normal position. I do like playing the weather is climate game though (bit of oneupmanship fun), cant let the doomsday cult have the game to themselves. You will not know what snow is like, ever again lol What does reading a weather map have to do with the simple fact that the planet's temperature is increasing?  The increase in global temperature over recent decades is clear and unambiguous. Greggery seems to be trying to deny the bleeding obvious.  Are you trying to do the same? the problem with yoru statement is that it is fundamentally untrue. even the CRU adn IPCC admit that there has been no statistically significant warming for the past 16 years - soon to be 17.

the problem with yoru statement is that it is fundamentally untrue. Neiher the CRU or the IPCC admit that there has been no statistically significant warming for the past 16 years - soon to be 17.

You are simply telling a lie.

If you are not - please provide a reference for the CRU or the IPCC admiting that there has been no statistically significant warming for the past 16 years.

The simple fact is that EVERY SINGLE ONE of the past 16 years has had a positive temperature anomaly with respect to the global 30 year average.

This means the planet is warming.

Denying this fact does not make it go away.  Nor does telling lies about what the CRU or the IPCC have said.

Bobby. wrote on Jan 5^th, 2013 at 11:42am:

Longy, Quote: actually glaciers have stopped recending, antarctica is increasine ice levela dn arctic has a underwater volcano. PLUS temperatures have not increased in 16 years Why can't you use the spell check tab?

Spelling is the least of his problems, If there was a lying tab the silly old bugger would always be using it.

skippy. wrote on Jan 5^th, 2013 at 11:55am:

Bobby. wrote on Jan 5th, 2013 at 11:42am: Longy, Quote: actually glaciers have stopped recending, antarctica is increasine ice levela dn arctic has a underwater volcano. PLUS temperatures have not increased in 16 years Why can't you use the spell check tab? Spelling is the least of his problems, If there was a lying tab the silly old bugger would always be using it.

Longweekend is illiterate.

rabbitoh07 wrote on Jan 5^th, 2013 at 11:54am:

gold_medal wrote on Jan 5th, 2013 at 10:50am: rabbitoh07 wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 10:03pm: progressiveslol wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 8:54pm: rabbitoh07 wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 8:28pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 6:47pm: gold_medal wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 6:45pm: adelcrow wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 6:18pm: Its the hottest day in Hobart since records have been taken and one of the hottest in Adelaide....yep the planet is cooling just like the deniers said it would  ;D not even close to the hottest in adelaide. in fact, it has been a very mild summer and BELOW average temperatures. you get one day that is hot and you come up with this crap. Yep.  When it's convenient for their "argument", AGW alarmists will use local weather in place of world climate every time. Who is using local weather in place of world climate every time Greggery? The world climate is also increasing.  That is the point. That is what has been predicted for decades.  That is what is happening. What don't you understand? I dont understand how you cant read a weather map and how you dont know the consequences of highs, lack of h2o and a monsoon trough that is far from its normal position. I do like playing the weather is climate game though (bit of oneupmanship fun), cant let the doomsday cult have the game to themselves. You will not know what snow is like, ever again lol What does reading a weather map have to do with the simple fact that the planet's temperature is increasing?  The increase in global temperature over recent decades is clear and unambiguous. Greggery seems to be trying to deny the bleeding obvious.  Are you trying to do the same? the problem with yoru statement is that it is fundamentally untrue. even the CRU adn IPCC admit that there has been no statistically significant warming for the past 16 years - soon to be 17. the problem with yoru statement is that it is fundamentally untrue. Neiher the CRU or the IPCC admit that there has been no statistically significant warming for the past 16 years - soon to be 17. You are simply telling a lie. If you are not - please provide a reference for the CRU or the IPCC admiting that there has been no statistically significant warming for the past 16 years. The simple fact is that EVERY SINGLE ONE of the past 16 years has had a positive temperature anomaly with respect to the global 30 year average. This means the planet is warming. Denying this fact does not make it go away.  Nor does telling lies about what the CRU or the IPCC have said.

Yet no co2 correlation at all.

rabbitoh07 wrote on Jan 5^th, 2013 at 11:54am:

gold_medal wrote on Jan 5th, 2013 at 10:50am: rabbitoh07 wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 10:03pm: progressiveslol wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 8:54pm: rabbitoh07 wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 8:28pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 6:47pm: gold_medal wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 6:45pm: adelcrow wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 6:18pm: Its the hottest day in Hobart since records have been taken and one of the hottest in Adelaide....yep the planet is cooling just like the deniers said it would  ;D not even close to the hottest in adelaide. in fact, it has been a very mild summer and BELOW average temperatures. you get one day that is hot and you come up with this crap. Yep.  When it's convenient for their "argument", AGW alarmists will use local weather in place of world climate every time. Who is using local weather in place of world climate every time Greggery? The world climate is also increasing.  That is the point. That is what has been predicted for decades.  That is what is happening. What don't you understand? I dont understand how you cant read a weather map and how you dont know the consequences of highs, lack of h2o and a monsoon trough that is far from its normal position. I do like playing the weather is climate game though (bit of oneupmanship fun), cant let the doomsday cult have the game to themselves. You will not know what snow is like, ever again lol What does reading a weather map have to do with the simple fact that the planet's temperature is increasing?  The increase in global temperature over recent decades is clear and unambiguous. Greggery seems to be trying to deny the bleeding obvious.  Are you trying to do the same? the problem with yoru statement is that it is fundamentally untrue. even the CRU adn IPCC admit that there has been no statistically significant warming for the past 16 years - soon to be 17. the problem with yoru statement is that it is fundamentally untrue. Neiher the CRU or the IPCC admit that there has been no statistically significant warming for the past 16 years - soon to be 17. You are simply telling a lie. If you are not - please provide a reference for the CRU or the IPCC admiting that there has been no statistically significant warming for the past 16 years. The simple fact is that EVERY SINGLE ONE of the past 16 years has had a positive temperature anomaly with respect to the global 30 year average. This means the planet is warming. Denying this fact does not make it go away.  Nor does telling lies about what the CRU or the IPCC have said.

let me first applaud your very effective way of telling a fact and missing the truth by answering a question not asked.

yes the last 16 years is warmer than the preceding 30 year average. the point, dear hysteric, is that the last 16 years have shown NO temperature increase. this is indicative of a possible end to warming and the possibility of cooling. maybe. what it is NOT is increased warming.

why is it that you climate hysterics are so absolutely terrible at statistics? from the embarrassing foolishness of the debunked hockey stick all the way to today, you simply reinterpret, misinterpret or blatantly lie about the data.

NO WARMING IN 16 YEARS.  explain it all you want. call it a pause in the path of increased warming if you wish. But don't look like a ideologically driven blind person who cant count by saying that it is still getting warmer.  that's just wrong.

gold_medal wrote on Jan 5^th, 2013 at 11:30am:

actually glaciers have stopped recending,

No.  This is incorrect.  Please do not tell lies.

Global glacial mass balance has been decreasing for decades and continues to decrease.
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/bams-state-of-the-climate/2009-time-series/glacier


gold_medal wrote on Jan 5^th, 2013 at 11:30am:

antarctica is increasine ice level

No.  This is incorrect.  Please do not tell lies.

Continental ice on Antarctica is decreasing at a faster rate than originally predicted:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-20804192

and this decrease in continental ice is resulting in an increase in extent of sea ice


gold_medal wrote on Jan 5^th, 2013 at 11:30am:

a dn arctic has a underwater volcano.

Does it?

What does this have to do with the fact that arctic sea ice is now at the least extent ever recorded?


gold_medal wrote on Jan 5^th, 2013 at 11:30am:

PLUS temperatures have not increased in 16 years

gold_medal wrote on Jan 5^th, 2013 at 11:30am:

the chain of 'facts' is actully very thin. there is no direct proof that humans are responsible for waring. it is just a hypothesis that remains to be proven or disproven.

Actually, there is a vast amount of evidence that humans are responsible for warming.  Denying it by telling lies as you have just been doing is just silly.

gold_medal wrote on Jan 5^th, 2013 at 11:59am:

rabbitoh07 wrote on Jan 5th, 2013 at 11:54am: gold_medal wrote on Jan 5th, 2013 at 10:50am: rabbitoh07 wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 10:03pm: progressiveslol wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 8:54pm: rabbitoh07 wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 8:28pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 6:47pm: gold_medal wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 6:45pm: adelcrow wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 6:18pm: Its the hottest day in Hobart since records have been taken and one of the hottest in Adelaide....yep the planet is cooling just like the deniers said it would  ;D not even close to the hottest in adelaide. in fact, it has been a very mild summer and BELOW average temperatures. you get one day that is hot and you come up with this crap. Yep.  When it's convenient for their "argument", AGW alarmists will use local weather in place of world climate every time. Who is using local weather in place of world climate every time Greggery? The world climate is also increasing.  That is the point. That is what has been predicted for decades.  That is what is happening. What don't you understand? I dont understand how you cant read a weather map and how you dont know the consequences of highs, lack of h2o and a monsoon trough that is far from its normal position. I do like playing the weather is climate game though (bit of oneupmanship fun), cant let the doomsday cult have the game to themselves. You will not know what snow is like, ever again lol What does reading a weather map have to do with the simple fact that the planet's temperature is increasing?  The increase in global temperature over recent decades is clear and unambiguous. Greggery seems to be trying to deny the bleeding obvious.  Are you trying to do the same? the problem with yoru statement is that it is fundamentally untrue. even the CRU adn IPCC admit that there has been no statistically significant warming for the past 16 years - soon to be 17. the problem with yoru statement is that it is fundamentally untrue. Neiher the CRU or the IPCC admit that there has been no statistically significant warming for the past 16 years - soon to be 17. You are simply telling a lie. If you are not - please provide a reference for the CRU or the IPCC admiting that there has been no statistically significant warming for the past 16 years. The simple fact is that EVERY SINGLE ONE of the past 16 years has had a positive temperature anomaly with respect to the global 30 year average. This means the planet is warming. Denying this fact does not make it go away.  Nor does telling lies about what the CRU or the IPCC have said. let me first applaud your very effective way of telling a fact and missing the truth by answering a question not asked. yes the last 16 years is warmer than the preceding 30 year average. the point, dear hysteric, is that the last 16 years have shown NO temperature increase. this is indicative of a possible end to warming and the possibility of cooling. maybe. what it is NOT is increased warming. why is it that you climate hysterics are so absolutely terrible at statistics? from the embarrassing foolishness of the debunked hockey stick all the way to today, you simply reinterpret, misinterpret or blatantly lie about the data. NO WARMING IN 16 YEARS.  explain it all you want. call it a pause in the path of increased warming if you wish. But don't look like a ideologically driven blind person who cant count by saying that it is still getting warmer.  that's just wrong.

The simple fact is that EVERY SINGLE ONE of the past 16 years has had a positive temperature anomaly with respect to the global 30 year average.

This means the planet is warming.

Denying it is silly.  Trying to rely nonsense about "no warming" as written by David Rose in a Daily Mail article is even sillier.

Where is your reference for the CRU or the IPCC admiting that there has been no statistically significant warming for the past 16 years?  Please show us or apologise for lying to the forum.

So Longy is continuing with the "it hasn't warmed in 16 years" lie. Its just a case of statistical cherry picking that the denialists are so famous for. Start the graph in 1999 and it has actually been warming for the past 13 years.

The true test though is that last decade was warmer than the one before it, and the one before that, and the one before that. Global warming is a long term trend. Cherry picking 16 years of data is just plain dishonest.

---

The_Barnacle wrote on Jan 5^th, 2013 at 12:08pm:

So Longy is continuing with the "it hasn't warmed in 16 years" lie. Its just a case of statistical cherry picking that the denialists are so famous for. Start the graph in 1999 and it has actually been warming for the past 13 years. The true test though is that last decade was warmer than the one before it, and the one before that, and the one before that. Global warming is a long term trend. Cherry picking 16 years of data is just plain dishonest.

You need an updated graph and one you didnt make yourself. Get one from a reputable source, unless you think the MET office is not.

progressiveslol wrote on Jan 5^th, 2013 at 12:11pm:

The_Barnacle wrote on Jan 5th, 2013 at 12:08pm: So Longy is continuing with the "it hasn't warmed in 16 years" lie. Its just a case of statistical cherry picking that the denialists are so famous for. Start the graph in 1999 and it has actually been warming for the past 13 years. The true test though is that last decade was warmer than the one before it, and the one before that, and the one before that. Global warming is a long term trend. Cherry picking 16 years of data is just plain dishonest. You need an updated graph and one you didnt make yourself. Get one from a reputable source, unless you think the MET office is not.

But the fact is the MET office have never claimed that warming has stopped the past 16 years. That was the tabloid Mail on Sunday's claim.


Quote:

The British newspaper the Mail on Sunday and its writer David Rose are notorious for publishing misleading (at best) climate-related articles, as we have discussed previously here, for example.  They have recently struck again, claiming that according to a "quietly released" Met Office report, global warming stopped 16 years ago (a myth which Skeptical Science debunks here and here).  This assertion is entirely fabricated, as the Met Office explained by publishing David Rose's inquiry and the Met Office's responses.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/oct/16/daily-mail-global-warming-stopped-wrong

The_Barnacle wrote on Jan 5^th, 2013 at 12:36pm:

progressiveslol wrote on Jan 5th, 2013 at 12:11pm: The_Barnacle wrote on Jan 5th, 2013 at 12:08pm: So Longy is continuing with the "it hasn't warmed in 16 years" lie. Its just a case of statistical cherry picking that the denialists are so famous for. Start the graph in 1999 and it has actually been warming for the past 13 years. The true test though is that last decade was warmer than the one before it, and the one before that, and the one before that. Global warming is a long term trend. Cherry picking 16 years of data is just plain dishonest. You need an updated graph and one you didnt make yourself. Get one from a reputable source, unless you think the MET office is not. But the fact is the MET office have never claimed that warming has stopped the past 16 years. That was the tabloid Mail on Sunday's claim. Quote: The British newspaper the Mail on Sunday and its writer David Rose are notorious for publishing misleading (at best) climate-related articles, as we have discussed previously here, for example.  They have recently struck again, claiming that according to a "quietly released" Met Office report, global warming stopped 16 years ago (a myth which Skeptical Science debunks here and here).  This assertion is entirely fabricated, as the Met Office explained by publishing David Rose's inquiry and the Met Office's responses. http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/oct/16/daily-mail-global-warming-stopped-wrong

They dont have to tell us the inconvenient. The graph tells us and shcool level math tells us that 1 = 1.

It seems pretty bloody obvious to me that if the denialists said the cold snap we had in the middle of winter meant global cooling was upon us then this heatwave means global warming is a certainty..Im just using the denialists logic  :D

adelcrow wrote on Jan 5^th, 2013 at 12:50pm:

It seems pretty bloody obvious to me that if the denialists said the cold snap we had in the middle of winter meant global cooling was upon us then this heatwave means global warming is a certainty..Im just using the denialists logic  :D

Except you are slow as usual. The doomsday cult are the ones trying to use weather as climate. The game begins with the cult as other BS doomsday predictions have hurt your own philosophy.

progressiveslol wrote on Jan 5^th, 2013 at 12:57pm:

adelcrow wrote on Jan 5th, 2013 at 12:50pm: It seems pretty bloody obvious to me that if the denialists said the cold snap we had in the middle of winter meant global cooling was upon us then this heatwave means global warming is a certainty..Im just using the denialists logic  :D Except you are slow as usual. The doomsday cult are the ones trying to use weather as climate. The game begins with the cult as other BS doomsday predictions have hurt your own philosophy.

Hey I agree with you, we should always listen to shock jocks, lobbyists and pollies looking to shore up their seats.
Science and peer reviewed research has no place in a modern society

progressiveslol wrote on Jan 5^th, 2013 at 12:57pm:

adelcrow wrote on Jan 5th, 2013 at 12:50pm: It seems pretty bloody obvious to me that if the denialists said the cold snap we had in the middle of winter meant global cooling was upon us then this heatwave means global warming is a certainty..Im just using the denialists logic  :D Except you are slow as usual. The doomsday cult are the ones trying to use weather as climate. The game begins with the cult as other BS doomsday predictions have hurt your own philosophy.

Yet the overwhelming majority of confusionalists have no smacking idea of the difference between climate and weather. We even have poor old cods asking every other day what the difference is, and she is one of the smart ones compered  to the rest of you.

adelcrow wrote on Jan 5^th, 2013 at 1:00pm:

progressiveslol wrote on Jan 5th, 2013 at 12:57pm: adelcrow wrote on Jan 5th, 2013 at 12:50pm: It seems pretty bloody obvious to me that if the denialists said the cold snap we had in the middle of winter meant global cooling was upon us then this heatwave means global warming is a certainty..Im just using the denialists logic  :D Except you are slow as usual. The doomsday cult are the ones trying to use weather as climate. The game begins with the cult as other BS doomsday predictions have hurt your own philosophy. Hey I agree with you, we should always listen to shock jocks, lobbyists and pollies looking to shore up their seats. Science and peer reviewed research has no place in a modern society

Religion does not have a place in our politics and that goes for any cult as well.

rabbitoh07 wrote on Jan 5^th, 2013 at 12:02pm:

gold_medal wrote on Jan 5th, 2013 at 11:30am: actually glaciers have stopped recending, No.  This is incorrect.  Please do not tell lies. Global glacial mass balance has been decreasing for decades and continues to decrease. http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/bams-state-of-the-climate/2009-time-series/glacier NOAA has a quite enviable record for being wrong. \ gold_medal wrote on Jan 5th, 2013 at 11:30am: antarctica is increasine ice level No.  This is incorrect.  Please do not tell lies. The lies are yours. western antarci ice increases are in excess of east antartic ice losses. you do have to count both, you know! Continental ice on Antarctica is decreasing at a faster rate than originally predicted: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-20804192 and this decrease in continental ice is resulting in an increase in extent of sea ice gold_medal wrote on Jan 5th, 2013 at 11:30am: a dn arctic has a underwater volcano. Does it? What does this have to do with the fact that arctic sea ice is now at the least extent ever recorded? seriously??? it has to be explalned to you why an huge underwater voilcano under the arcitc ice cap has an effect on ice mass??? gold_medal wrote on Jan 5th, 2013 at 11:30am: PLUS temperatures have not increased in 16 years gold_medal wrote on Jan 5th, 2013 at 11:30am: the chain of 'facts' is actully very thin. there is no direct proof that humans are responsible for waring. it is just a hypothesis that remains to be proven or disproven. Actually, there is a vast amount of evidence that humans are responsible for warming.  Denying it by telling lies as you have just been doing is just silly.

the probem with your position is that ACTUAL RECORDED TEMPERATURES are not rising. argue all you like but it is true.  AS ai said before. Argue the pause if you will - that at least is credible. Arguing that termpeatures are still rising not only makes you look like a fool, but confirms it.

rabbitoh07 wrote on Jan 5^th, 2013 at 12:05pm:

gold_medal wrote on Jan 5th, 2013 at 11:59am: rabbitoh07 wrote on Jan 5th, 2013 at 11:54am: gold_medal wrote on Jan 5th, 2013 at 10:50am: rabbitoh07 wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 10:03pm: progressiveslol wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 8:54pm: rabbitoh07 wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 8:28pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 6:47pm: gold_medal wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 6:45pm: adelcrow wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 6:18pm: Its the hottest day in Hobart since records have been taken and one of the hottest in Adelaide....yep the planet is cooling just like the deniers said it would  ;D not even close to the hottest in adelaide. in fact, it has been a very mild summer and BELOW average temperatures. you get one day that is hot and you come up with this crap. Yep.  When it's convenient for their "argument", AGW alarmists will use local weather in place of world climate every time. Who is using local weather in place of world climate every time Greggery? The world climate is also increasing.  That is the point. That is what has been predicted for decades.  That is what is happening. What don't you understand? I dont understand how you cant read a weather map and how you dont know the consequences of highs, lack of h2o and a monsoon trough that is far from its normal position. I do like playing the weather is climate game though (bit of oneupmanship fun), cant let the doomsday cult have the game to themselves. You will not know what snow is like, ever again lol What does reading a weather map have to do with the simple fact that the planet's temperature is increasing?  The increase in global temperature over recent decades is clear and unambiguous. Greggery seems to be trying to deny the bleeding obvious.  Are you trying to do the same? the problem with your statement is that it is fundamentally untrue. even the CRU and IPCC admit that there has been no statistically significant warming for the past 16 years - soon to be 17. the problem with yoru statement is that it is fundamentally untrue. Neither the CRU or the IPCC admit that there has been no statistically significant warming for the past 16 years - soon to be 17. You are simply telling a lie. If you are not - please provide a reference for the CRU or the IPCC admiting that there has been no statistically significant warming for the past 16 years. The simple fact is that EVERY SINGLE ONE of the past 16 years has had a positive temperature anomaly with respect to the global 30 year average. This means the planet is warming. Denying this fact does not make it go away.  Nor does telling lies about what the CRU or the IPCC have said. let me first applaud your very effective way of telling a fact and missing the truth by answering a question not asked. yes the last 16 years is warmer than the preceding 30 year average. the point, dear hysteric, is that the last 16 years have shown NO temperature increase. this is indicative of a possible end to warming and the possibility of cooling. maybe. what it is NOT is increased warming. why is it that you climate hysterics are so absolutely terrible at statistics? from the embarrassing foolishness of the debunked hockey stick all the way to today, you simply reinterpret, misinterpret or blatantly lie about the data. NO WARMING IN 16 YEARS.  explain it all you want. call it a pause in the path of increased warming if you wish. But don't look like a ideologically driven blind person who cant count by saying that it is still getting warmer.  that's just wrong. The simple fact is that EVERY SINGLE ONE of the past 16 years has had a positive temperature anomaly with respect to the global 30 year average. This means the planet is warming. Denying it is silly.  Trying to rely nonsense about "no warming" as written by David Rose in a Daily Mail article is even sillier. Where is your reference for the CRU or the IPCC admitting that there has been no statistically significant warming for the past 16 years?  Please show us or apologise for lying to the forum.

repeating your misinterpretation does not change its BASIC fallacy. 16 years where temperatures have not risen means one thing. NO TEMPERATURE RISE in 16 years. If you want, we can compare it to the MWP or football scores but nothing changes the FACT that for 16 years, temperatures have not risen.

The_Barnacle wrote on Jan 5^th, 2013 at 12:36pm:

progressiveslol wrote on Jan 5th, 2013 at 12:11pm: The_Barnacle wrote on Jan 5th, 2013 at 12:08pm: So Longy is continuing with the "it hasn't warmed in 16 years" lie. Its just a case of statistical cherry picking that the denialists are so famous for. Start the graph in 1999 and it has actually been warming for the past 13 years. The true test though is that last decade was warmer than the one before it, and the one before that, and the one before that. Global warming is a long term trend. Cherry picking 16 years of data is just plain dishonest. You need an updated graph and one you didnt make yourself. Get one from a reputable source, unless you think the MET office is not. But the fact is the MET office have never claimed that warming has stopped the past 16 years. That was the tabloid Mail on Sunday's claim. Quote: The British newspaper the Mail on Sunday and its writer David Rose are notorious for publishing misleading (at best) climate-related articles, as we have discussed previously here, for example.  They have recently struck again, claiming that according to a "quietly released" Met Office report, global warming stopped 16 years ago (a myth which Skeptical Science debunks here and here).  This assertion is entirely fabricated, as the Met Office explained by publishing David Rose's inquiry and the Met Office's responses. http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/oct/16/daily-mail-global-warming-stopped-wrong

The UK MET are incapable of admitting anything other than the hysterical position. They are so bad that the UK Parliament held an enquiry into them after that had for 5 consecutive years said that the year will be record hot while the result was near record cold. After a awhile, even the parliament got sick of their idiotic predictions.

And so now, the MET  release a graph that clearly and unequivocally shows no warming for 16 years and then says no, it is actually warming.

so do you understand why we take so much so-called expert opinion with a pinch of salt?  They are either incompetent or lie. not much of a choice!

adelcrow wrote on Jan 5^th, 2013 at 1:00pm:

progressiveslol wrote on Jan 5th, 2013 at 12:57pm: adelcrow wrote on Jan 5th, 2013 at 12:50pm: It seems pretty bloody obvious to me that if the denialists said the cold snap we had in the middle of winter meant global cooling was upon us then this heatwave means global warming is a certainty..Im just using the denialists logic  :D Except you are slow as usual. The doomsday cult are the ones trying to use weather as climate. The game begins with the cult as other BS doomsday predictions have hurt your own philosophy. Hey I agree with you, we should always listen to shock jocks, lobbyists and pollies looking to shore up their seats. Science and peer reviewed research has no place in a modern society

if you were half the sciientist you claim to be, you would know that peer review is a relatively recent concept. Einstein and other such luminaries were not peer-reviewd. In fact, the only time consensues (ie peers) were against him was when they were proven spectacularly wrong.

And you seem to think peer-review is some magic bullet where most peer review are cursory and never involved checking the maths or confirming the results.

gold_medal wrote on Jan 5^th, 2013 at 2:05pm:

adelcrow wrote on Jan 5th, 2013 at 1:00pm: progressiveslol wrote on Jan 5th, 2013 at 12:57pm: adelcrow wrote on Jan 5th, 2013 at 12:50pm: It seems pretty bloody obvious to me that if the denialists said the cold snap we had in the middle of winter meant global cooling was upon us then this heatwave means global warming is a certainty..Im just using the denialists logic  :D Except you are slow as usual. The doomsday cult are the ones trying to use weather as climate. The game begins with the cult as other BS doomsday predictions have hurt your own philosophy. Hey I agree with you, we should always listen to shock jocks, lobbyists and pollies looking to shore up their seats. Science and peer reviewed research has no place in a modern society if you were half the sciientist you claim to be, you would know that peer review is a relatively recent concept. Einstein and other such luminaries were not peer-reviewd. In fact, the only time consensues (ie peers) were against him was when they were proven spectacularly wrong. And you seem to think peer-review is some magic bullet where most peer review are cursory and never involved checking the maths or confirming the results.

Thats why I only listen to Shock jocks, lobbyists and pollies who are trying to shore up their seats..its just common sense

gold_medal wrote on Jan 5^th, 2013 at 1:56pm:

rabbitoh07 wrote on Jan 5th, 2013 at 12:02pm: gold_medal wrote on Jan 5th, 2013 at 11:30am: actually glaciers have stopped recending, No.  This is incorrect.  Please do not tell lies. Global glacial mass balance has been decreasing for decades and continues to decrease. http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/bams-state-of-the-climate/2009-time-series/glacier NOAA has a quite enviable record for being wrong. \ gold_medal wrote on Jan 5th, 2013 at 11:30am: antarctica is increasine ice level No.  This is incorrect.  Please do not tell lies. The lies are yours. western antarci ice increases are in excess of east antartic ice losses. you do have to count both, you know! Continental ice on Antarctica is decreasing at a faster rate than originally predicted: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-20804192 and this decrease in continental ice is resulting in an increase in extent of sea ice gold_medal wrote on Jan 5th, 2013 at 11:30am: a dn arctic has a underwater volcano. Does it? What does this have to do with the fact that arctic sea ice is now at the least extent ever recorded? seriously??? it has to be explalned to you why an huge underwater voilcano under the arcitc ice cap has an effect on ice mass??? gold_medal wrote on Jan 5th, 2013 at 11:30am: PLUS temperatures have not increased in 16 years gold_medal wrote on Jan 5th, 2013 at 11:30am: the chain of 'facts' is actully very thin. there is no direct proof that humans are responsible for waring. it is just a hypothesis that remains to be proven or disproven. Actually, there is a vast amount of evidence that humans are responsible for warming.  Denying it by telling lies as you have just been doing is just silly. the probem with your position is that ACTUAL RECORDED TEMPERATURES are not rising. argue all you like but it is true.  AS ai said before. Argue the pause if you will - that at least is credible. Arguing that termpeatures are still rising not only makes you look like a fool, but confirms it.

Could you please explain why you told an outright lie.

You wrote:
actually glaciers have stopped recending,

I have show you evidence that your statement is 100% wrong.

Please show evidence to support your statement - or admit that you were simply telling a lie.

gold_medal wrote on Jan 5^th, 2013 at 2:05pm:

adelcrow wrote on Jan 5th, 2013 at 1:00pm: progressiveslol wrote on Jan 5th, 2013 at 12:57pm: adelcrow wrote on Jan 5th, 2013 at 12:50pm: It seems pretty bloody obvious to me that if the denialists said the cold snap we had in the middle of winter meant global cooling was upon us then this heatwave means global warming is a certainty..Im just using the denialists logic  :D Except you are slow as usual. The doomsday cult are the ones trying to use weather as climate. The game begins with the cult as other BS doomsday predictions have hurt your own philosophy. Hey I agree with you, we should always listen to shock jocks, lobbyists and pollies looking to shore up their seats. Science and peer reviewed research has no place in a modern society if you were half the sciientist you claim to be, you would know that peer review is a relatively recent concept. Einstein and other such luminaries were not peer-reviewd. In fact, the only time consensues (ie peers) were against him was when they were proven spectacularly wrong. And you seem to think peer-review is some magic bullet where most peer review are cursory and never involved checking the maths or confirming the results.

if you were half the "sciientist" you claim to be, you wouldn't tell lies.

Please provide evidence to support your statement:

"actually glaciers have stopped recending,"

or apologise for trying to lie to the forum.

gold_medal wrote on Jan 5^th, 2013 at 1:56pm:

The lies are yours. western antarci ice increases are in excess of east antartic ice losses. you do have to count both, you know!

Do you really think you will get away with simply making stuff up?  Who do you think you are convincing with this childishness?

I already posted evidence that the Western Antarctic Ice Sheet is warming nearly twice as fast as previously thought.

The East Antarctice ice shelf is likewise losing ice.
A new study shows that the world's largest ice shelf has lost almost 60 billion tonnes of ice per year for the past three years.
http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2009/s2751232.htm

Continental ice in the east antarctic is gaining ice, again because of warming.  As you are probably blissfully unaware, Antarctica is the worlds driest continent.  It is dry because cold air contains less moisture.  The warming of the Antarctic interior is causing an increase in precipitation - hence, a gain in ice.

So - your initial statement "antarctica is increasine ice level" as "evidence" that the earth is not warming is simply nonsense.

While there is some increase in sea ice (due to the runoff of fresh melt water) and in interior ice (from increased precipitation), there is still a net decrease of ice mass over atntarctica.

With climate change, some scientists had expected that warmer air would increase snowfall over Antarctica, and that this would largely offset the increased ice loss from Greenland caused by warmer seas. In recent years, however, a number of studies have shown2–4 that both ice sheets are losing mass at an alarming rate, as ice streams speed up their seaward journeys and more and bigger icebergs are discharged into the ocean.
http://www.nature.com/news/grim-picture-of-polar-ice-sheet-loss-1.11921

So, please stop making things up.  You are not fooling anyone except yourself.

gold_medal wrote on Jan 5^th, 2013 at 1:56pm:

it has to be explalned to you why an huge underwater voilcano under the arcitc ice cap has an effect on ice mass???

Yes.  Yes it does have to be explained to me.  Please show us evidence of a " huge underwater voilcano" that is causing the arctic ice cap to melt.

Or better still - stop making things up.  You are not fooling anybody.

gold_medal wrote on Jan 5^th, 2013 at 1:59pm:

repeating your misinterpretation does not change its BASIC fallacy. 16 years where temperatures have not risen means one thing. NO TEMPERATURE RISE in 16 years. If you want, we can compare it to the MWP or football scores but nothing changes the FACT that for 16 years, temperatures have not risen.

Excuse me?!?!  What basic fallacy?!?!?

Tell us - what are these "16 years" you keep referring to in which "temperatures have not risen."?!?!

Given that 2010 and 2005 was the hottest years ever recorded - you certainly cannot be referring to the past 16 years.

2010 tied with 2005 as the warmest year of the global surface temperature record, beginning in 1880. This was the 34th consecutive year with global temperatures above the 20th century average.
http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2011/20110112_globalstats.html

So - WTF are you talking about?!?!?!

rabbitoh07 wrote on Jan 5^th, 2013 at 4:11pm:

gold_medal wrote on Jan 5th, 2013 at 1:56pm: The lies are yours. western antarci ice increases are in excess of east antartic ice losses. you do have to count both, you know! Do you really think you will get away with simply making stuff up?  Who do you think you are convincing with this childishness? I already posted evidence that the Western Antarctic Ice Sheet is warming nearly twice as fast as previously thought. The East Antarctice ice shelf is likewise losing ice. A new study shows that the world's largest ice shelf has lost almost 60 billion tonnes of ice per year for the past three years. http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2009/s2751232.htm Continental ice in the east antarctic is gaining ice, again because of warming.  As you are probably blissfully unaware, Antarctica is the worlds driest continent.  It is dry because cold air contains less moisture.  The warming of the Antarctic interior is causing an increase in precipitation - hence, a gain in ice. So - your initial statement "antarctica is increasine ice level" as "evidence" that the earth is not warming is simply nonsense. While there is some increase in sea ice (due to the runoff of fresh melt water) and in interior ice (from increased precipitation), there is still a net decrease of ice mass over atntarctica. With climate change, some scientists had expected that warmer air would increase snowfall over Antarctica, and that this would largely offset the increased ice loss from Greenland caused by warmer seas. In recent years, however, a number of studies have shown2–4 that both ice sheets are losing mass at an alarming rate, as ice streams speed up their seaward journeys and more and bigger icebergs are discharged into the ocean. http://www.nature.com/news/grim-picture-of-polar-ice-sheet-loss-1.11921 So, please stop making things up.  You are not fooling anyone except yourself.

nice post. in one scetion you say that the ice is increasing because of warming and then in the next you say it is decresing because of warming.

nice one.

rabbitoh07 wrote on Jan 5^th, 2013 at 4:14pm:

gold_medal wrote on Jan 5th, 2013 at 1:56pm: it has to be explalned to you why an huge underwater voilcano under the arcitc ice cap has an effect on ice mass??? Yes.  Yes it does have to be explained to me.  Please show us evidence of a " huge underwater voilcano" that is causing the arctic ice cap to melt. Or better still - stop making things up.  You are not fooling anybody.

http://www.diabetesmine.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/popcorn.jpg

rabbitoh07 wrote on Jan 5^th, 2013 at 4:20pm:

gold_medal wrote on Jan 5th, 2013 at 1:59pm: repeating your misinterpretation does not change its BASIC fallacy. 16 years where temperatures have not risen means one thing. NO TEMPERATURE RISE in 16 years. If you want, we can compare it to the MWP or football scores but nothing changes the FACT that for 16 years, temperatures have not risen. Excuse me?!?!  What basic fallacy?!?!? Tell us - what are these "16 years" you keep referring to in which "temperatures have not risen."?!?! Given that 2010 and 2005 was the hottest years ever recorded - you certainly cannot be referring to the past 16 years. 2010 tied with 2005 as the warmest year of the global surface temperature record, beginning in 1880. This was the 34th consecutive year with global temperatures above the 20th century average. http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2011/20110112_globalstats.html So - WTF are you talking about?!?!?!

NOAA has been discredited more times tha lastnail. CRU has stated that temnperatures have been static for the last 16 years. Dont like it? dont care. its an indictment on the integrity of climate hysterics is that it doesnt matter what happens - you simply say it is warming. Teh day sydney harbour freezes over you will say it is the warmest year yet.

the METs own graph based from CRU which is THE authority on temperature says temperaturs are static.

but perhaps you wen to the Michale Mann school of science (which NOAA supports) where when calculating average temperatures for one of his reports, he averaged SUMMER temperatures not annual temperatures.

This is what the met said.

They even put it in pictures so that simpletons could understand. They certainly underestimated you, didn't they, goldie.

http://thinkprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/MetOffice.gif

http://cloudfront.mediamatters.org/static/images/item/warmestdecade.jpg

MOTR wrote on Jan 5^th, 2013 at 4:43pm:

rabbitoh07 wrote on Jan 5th, 2013 at 4:14pm: gold_medal wrote on Jan 5th, 2013 at 1:56pm: it has to be explalned to you why an huge underwater voilcano under the arcitc ice cap has an effect on ice mass??? Yes.  Yes it does have to be explained to me.  Please show us evidence of a " huge underwater voilcano" that is causing the arctic ice cap to melt. Or better still - stop making things up.  You are not fooling anybody. http://www.diabetesmine.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/popcorn.jpg

i have already posted links to the underwater volcano. Your repeated refusal to accept its existance and dumb-bunnys inability to understand how that could possibly affect the ice above it doesnt speak highly of you.

MOTR wrote on Jan 5^th, 2013 at 4:50pm:

This is what the met said. They even put it in pictures so that simpletons could understand. They certainly underestimated you, didn't they, goldie. http://thinkprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/MetOffice.gif http://cloudfront.mediamatters.org/static/images/item/warmestdecade.jpg

I think you missed this one:

---

gold_medal wrote on Jan 5^th, 2013 at 5:30pm:

MOTR wrote on Jan 5th, 2013 at 4:50pm: This is what the met said. They even put it in pictures so that simpletons could understand. They certainly underestimated you, didn't they, goldie. http://thinkprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/MetOffice.gif http://cloudfront.mediamatters.org/static/images/item/warmestdecade.jpg I think you missed this one:

tell me again how 2010 was a hot year based on the above.

yes, I do note that the graphs apparently differ and yet... sourced from the same place.  I wonder how that can be.  Perhaps some mann-like manipulation maybe??

gold_medal wrote on Jan 5^th, 2013 at 5:32pm:

gold_medal wrote on Jan 5th, 2013 at 5:30pm: MOTR wrote on Jan 5th, 2013 at 4:50pm: This is what the met said. They even put it in pictures so that simpletons could understand. They certainly underestimated you, didn't they, goldie. http://thinkprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/MetOffice.gif http://cloudfront.mediamatters.org/static/images/item/warmestdecade.jpg I think you missed this one: tell me again how 2010 was a hot year based on the above. yes, I do note that the graphs apparently differ and yet... sourced from the same place.  I wonder how that can be.  Perhaps some mann-like manipulation maybe??

You don't have faith in the colourful graphs?  What!?

That's what AGW alarmists base their entire argument on.

Don't knock the colourful little graphs: that's just not fair.

;)

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

read it and see how so many scientiests are being converted to the sceptic side - mainly by the lack of evidence for the alramist side.

gold_medal wrote on Jan 5^th, 2013 at 6:03pm:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204301404577171531838421366.html read it and see how so many scientiests are being converted to the sceptic side - mainly by the lack of evidence for the alramist side.

Please provide evidence to support your statement:

"actually glaciers have stopped recending,"

or apologise for trying to lie to the forum.

Don't try to change the subject until you explained why you told an outright lie.

did you read the article dumb-bunny or are you still desperately clinging to your floatie out in the ocean of despair>

READ THE ARTICLE

gold_medal wrote on Jan 5^th, 2013 at 5:32pm:

gold_medal wrote on Jan 5th, 2013 at 5:30pm: MOTR wrote on Jan 5th, 2013 at 4:50pm: This is what the met said. They even put it in pictures so that simpletons could understand. They certainly underestimated you, didn't they, goldie. http://thinkprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/MetOffice.gif http://cloudfront.mediamatters.org/static/images/item/warmestdecade.jpg I think you missed this one: tell me again how 2010 was a hot year based on the above. yes, I do note that the graphs apparently differ and yet... sourced from the same place.  I wonder how that can be.  Perhaps some mann-like manipulation maybe??

2010 was the hottest year ever recorded based on measurement.

It was not based on a silly graph drawn up by David Rose of the Telegraph.

Seriously!  Is that all you have as a source?
That is why you claim that there has been no warming for 16 years - even though the 12 hottest years ever recorded have occured in that 16 years.

I guess that explains why you tell lies.

Why did you lie about glacial decrease?

gold_medal wrote on Jan 5^th, 2013 at 6:27pm:

did you read the article dumb-bunny or are you still desperately clinging to your floatie out in the ocean of despair> READ THE ARTICLE

Yes.  I read the opinion piece by the usual suspects.  I would rather read research they had published on the subject - but that amounts to virtually zero, doesn't it.  Instead - they publish opinion pieces.  Good on them.


Now - please provide evidence to support your statement:

"actually glaciers have stopped recending,"

or apologise for trying to lie to the forum.

Don't try to change the subject until you explained why you told an outright lie.

rabbitoh07 wrote on Jan 5^th, 2013 at 6:29pm:

gold_medal wrote on Jan 5th, 2013 at 6:27pm: did you read the article dumb-bunny or are you still desperately clinging to your floatie out in the ocean of despair> READ THE ARTICLE Yes.  I read the opinion piece by the usual suspects.  I would rather read research they had published on the subject - but that amounts to virtually zero, doesn't it.  Instead - they publish opinion pieces.  Good on them. Now - please provide evidence to support your statement: "actually glaciers have stopped recending," or apologise for trying to lie to the forum. Don't try to change the subject until you explained why you told an outright lie.

so the 16 TOP OF THEIR PROFESSION scientiest who signed it means nothing to you??

oh but of course. Consensus is only important when it agrees with YOU. peer-review is only important when the answer is what you want.

do you know just why we sceptics treat you hysterics as such frauds???  it is so easy. you cant even accept PROOF - nevermind evidence.

gold_medal wrote on Jan 5^th, 2013 at 6:32pm:

rabbitoh07 wrote on Jan 5th, 2013 at 6:29pm: gold_medal wrote on Jan 5th, 2013 at 6:27pm: did you read the article dumb-bunny or are you still desperately clinging to your floatie out in the ocean of despair> READ THE ARTICLE Yes.  I read the opinion piece by the usual suspects.  I would rather read research they had published on the subject - but that amounts to virtually zero, doesn't it.  Instead - they publish opinion pieces.  Good on them. Now - please provide evidence to support your statement: "actually glaciers have stopped recending," or apologise for trying to lie to the forum. Don't try to change the subject until you explained why you told an outright lie. so the 16 TOP OF THEIR PROFESSION scientiest who signed it means nothing to you?? oh but of course. Consensus is only important when it agrees with YOU. peer-review is only important when the answer is what you want. do you know just why we sceptics treat you hysterics as such frauds???  it is so easy. you cant even accept PROOF - nevermind evidence.

Stop running away.We will get to your little opinion piece as soon as you answer the accusations of lying that have been made against you.

Please provide evidence to support your statement:

"actually glaciers have stopped recending,"

or apologise for trying to lie to the forum.

Don't try to change the subject until you explained why you told an outright lie.

hmm... let me see.... Who do I believe Al Gore, dumb-bunny and his merry band of non-scientists sprinkeld with a few unethical ones or the great preponderance of actual scientists who say that ACC is crap???

easy.

and even easier as none of the hysterical predictions of doom come to pass. damn, it isnt even getting warmer!

rabbitoh07 wrote on Jan 5^th, 2013 at 6:34pm:

gold_medal wrote on Jan 5th, 2013 at 6:32pm: rabbitoh07 wrote on Jan 5th, 2013 at 6:29pm: gold_medal wrote on Jan 5th, 2013 at 6:27pm: did you read the article dumb-bunny or are you still desperately clinging to your floatie out in the ocean of despair> READ THE ARTICLE Yes.  I read the opinion piece by the usual suspects.  I would rather read research they had published on the subject - but that amounts to virtually zero, doesn't it.  Instead - they publish opinion pieces.  Good on them. Now - please provide evidence to support your statement: "actually glaciers have stopped recending," or apologise for trying to lie to the forum. Don't try to change the subject until you explained why you told an outright lie. so the 16 TOP OF THEIR PROFESSION scientiest who signed it means nothing to you?? oh but of course. Consensus is only important when it agrees with YOU. peer-review is only important when the answer is what you want. do you know just why we sceptics treat you hysterics as such frauds???  it is so easy. you cant even accept PROOF - nevermind evidence. Stop running away.We will get to your little opinion piece as soon as you answer the accusations of lying that have been made against you. Please provide evidence to support your statement: "actually glaciers have stopped recending," or apologise for trying to lie to the forum. Don't try to change the subject until you explained why you told an outright lie.

you dont get to choose the subjects. the subject is ACC and it is in the dock. Temperatures have stopped increasing. none of the models are correct and thousands of scientists are denouncingn ACC as crap. Even the IPCC in its next report is downplaying the risk and elatedly admitting that its best models are not quite right (newspeak for rubbish).

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/01/04/the-dr-david-viner-moment-weve-all-been-waiting-for-a-new-snow-record/


another goody. hysterics predict that snow will be a thig of the past and voila...

A NEW SNOW RECORD.

it is of course global warming right? everything is nowadays

gold_medal wrote on Jan 5^th, 2013 at 6:36pm:

you dont get to choose the subjects. the subject is ACC and it is in the dock. Temperatures have stopped increasing.

No - they haven't.

The 12 hottest years ever recorded have occurred in the past 16 years.

Sea levels are rising.
Global glacial mass balance is decreasing.
The arctic ice cap is decreasing.
All results you would expect from a warming planet.

To claim that the earth is not warming is just silly.
Especially when all you seem to be basing that on is a nonsense Daily Mail article by David Rose.


gold_medal wrote on Jan 5^th, 2013 at 6:36pm:

none of the models are correct and thousands of scientists are denouncingn ACC as crap. Even the IPCC in its next report is downplaying the risk and elatedly admitting that its best models are not quite right (newspeak for rubbish).

Please provide evidence to support your statement:

"actually glaciers have stopped recending,"

or apologise for trying to lie to the forum.

Why do you think anyone will take you seriously when you get caught red-handed telling lies - and then run away when asked to explain yourself?

Get a load of this 1903 athropogenic climate change

athropogenic climate change was rife in those days, so was co2

Temps from 44 degrees right up to 50.5 degrees (in Goodooga) in 1903

http://stevengoddard.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/screenhunter_376-jan-04-19-38.jpg

Thanks to Steve Goddard
http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2013/01/05/110-years-ago-today-123-degrees-in-australia/

Wonder if BOM cleaned these records out

Goodooga 50.5 degrees
http://maps.google.com.au/maps?hl=en&sugexp=les%3B&gs_rn=1&gs_ri=hp&cp=6&gs_id=u&xhr=t&q=goodooga&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.&bvm=bv.1355534169,d.dGY&bpcl=40096503&biw=1920&bih=952&wrapid=tljp1357380985808012&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wl

Mount Drysdale 50 degrees
http://maps.google.com.au/maps?hl=en&q=mount+drysdale&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.&bvm=bv.1355534169,d.dGY&bpcl=40096503&biw=1920&bih=952&wrapid=tlif135737937971310&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wl

gold_medal wrote on Jan 5^th, 2013 at 6:39pm:

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/01/04/the-dr-david-viner-moment-weve-all-been-waiting-for-a-new-snow-record/ another goody. hysterics predict that snow will be a thig of the past and voila... A NEW SNOW RECORD. it is of course global warming right? everything is nowadays

It would really help, IF you caught up on the 1st of the 3 R's - Reading!!!

1) It is Climate Change, NOT Global Warming!
And, there are reasons for the "Climate Change" name.

2) Climate scientists are NOT simply saying that everywhere & all times, will be warmer.
In fact, IF you did some reading, you would discover that some areas will have more rain events, some will have more snow events, some will have more heat, BUT across the entire planet, IT WILL BE WARMER, but that heat will have other effects, in addition to just heat.


Extreme Wet
A warmer climate spurs the evaporation of water from land and sea and allows the atmosphere to hold more moisture—thus setting the stage for more extreme precipitation.

Extreme precipitation is likely when a storm passes through a warmer atmosphere holding more water. In warmer months, it takes the form of torrential rainstorms; in winter, blizzards are more likely.

Whether precipitation falls as rain or snow, these extremes can heighten the risk of flood, and cause economic and social disruptions for communities unprepared to cope.

Wet places tend to get wetter. Atmospheric circulation over oceans, plains, and mountains helps determine where rainforests thrive and semi-arid regions develop. However, wet places tend to get wetter and dry places dryer in a warming world—as is already occurring today. Places now wetter than the historical average include Northern Europe, eastern North and South America, and northern and central Asia.

Yet even as rainfall occurs in heavier events, the periods between these extremes are likely to become longer, warmer, and drier. Scientists expect these trends to intensify if our carbon emissions continue unabated.

Link -
http://www.climatehotmap.org/global-warming-effects/rain-and-snow.html
===============================
[b]Enjoy your reading, Longy?[/b]

gold_medal wrote on Jan 5^th, 2013 at 6:39pm:

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/01/04/the-dr-david-viner-moment-weve-all-been-waiting-for-a-new-snow-record/ another goody. hysterics predict that snow will be a thig of the past and voila... A NEW SNOW RECORD. it is of course global warming right? everything is nowadays

Yes. That is correct.  Global warming does cause more snow.

Climate change is not only making the planet warmer, it is also making snowstorms stronger and more frequent.

"Heavy snowstorms are not inconsistent with a warming planet," said scientist Jeff Masters, as part of a conference call with reporters and colleagues convened by the Union of Concern Scientists. "In fact, as the Earth gets warmer and more moisture gets absorbed into the atmosphere, we are steadily loading the dice in favor of more extreme storms in all seasons, capable of causing greater impacts on society."

Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2011-03-global-snowstorms-scientists.html#jCp

progressiveslol wrote on Jan 5^th, 2013 at 7:49pm:

Get a load of this 1903 athropogenic climate change athropogenic climate change was rife in those days, so was co2 Temps from 44 degrees right up to 50.5 degrees (in Goodooga) in 1903 http://stevengoddard.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/screenhunter_376-jan-04-19-38.jpg Thanks to Steve Goddard http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2013/01/05/110-years-ago-today-123-degrees-in-australia/ Wonder if BOM cleaned these records out Goodooga 50.5 degrees http://maps.google.com.au/maps?hl=en&sugexp=les%3B&gs_rn=1&gs_ri=hp&cp=6&gs_id=u&xhr=t&q=goodooga&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.&bvm=bv.1355534169,d.dGY&bpcl=40096503&biw=1920&bih=952&wrapid=tljp1357380985808012&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wl Mount Drysdale 50 degrees http://maps.google.com.au/maps?hl=en&q=mount+drysdale&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.&bvm=bv.1355534169,d.dGY&bpcl=40096503&biw=1920&bih=952&wrapid=tlif135737937971310&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wl

Yes.  THere have been very hot weather events in the past.

Is there a point to this?

rabbitoh07 wrote on Jan 5^th, 2013 at 8:44pm:

progressiveslol wrote on Jan 5th, 2013 at 7:49pm: Get a load of this 1903 athropogenic climate change athropogenic climate change was rife in those days, so was co2 Temps from 44 degrees right up to 50.5 degrees (in Goodooga) in 1903 http://stevengoddard.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/screenhunter_376-jan-04-19-38.jpg Thanks to Steve Goddard http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2013/01/05/110-years-ago-today-123-degrees-in-australia/ Wonder if BOM cleaned these records out Goodooga 50.5 degrees http://maps.google.com.au/maps?hl=en&sugexp=les%3B&gs_rn=1&gs_ri=hp&cp=6&gs_id=u&xhr=t&q=goodooga&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.&bvm=bv.1355534169,d.dGY&bpcl=40096503&biw=1920&bih=952&wrapid=tljp1357380985808012&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wl Mount Drysdale 50 degrees http://maps.google.com.au/maps?hl=en&q=mount+drysdale&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.&bvm=bv.1355534169,d.dGY&bpcl=40096503&biw=1920&bih=952&wrapid=tlif135737937971310&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wl Yes.  THere have been very hot weather events in the past. Is there a point to this?

Just following the NASA scientist who thinks a heat wave shows the doomsday cult must be correct about anthropogenic climate change. Only problem though, is that co2 level were pretty low in 1903.

Following the doomsday cult weather is climate mantra.

rabbitoh07 wrote on Jan 5^th, 2013 at 8:44pm:

progressiveslol wrote on Jan 5th, 2013 at 7:49pm: Get a load of this 1903 athropogenic climate change athropogenic climate change was rife in those days, so was co2 Temps from 44 degrees right up to 50.5 degrees (in Goodooga) in 1903 http://stevengoddard.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/screenhunter_376-jan-04-19-38.jpg Thanks to Steve Goddard http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2013/01/05/110-years-ago-today-123-degrees-in-australia/ Wonder if BOM cleaned these records out Goodooga 50.5 degrees http://maps.google.com.au/maps?hl=en&sugexp=les%3B&gs_rn=1&gs_ri=hp&cp=6&gs_id=u&xhr=t&q=goodooga&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.&bvm=bv.1355534169,d.dGY&bpcl=40096503&biw=1920&bih=952&wrapid=tljp1357380985808012&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wl Mount Drysdale 50 degrees http://maps.google.com.au/maps?hl=en&q=mount+drysdale&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.&bvm=bv.1355534169,d.dGY&bpcl=40096503&biw=1920&bih=952&wrapid=tlif135737937971310&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wl Yes.  THere have been very hot weather events in the past. Is there a point to this?

not just hot - HOTTER. a lot hotter. but just like the MWP you simply ignore it and say it didnt happen

gold_medal wrote on Jan 6^th, 2013 at 7:52am:

rabbitoh07 wrote on Jan 5th, 2013 at 8:44pm: progressiveslol wrote on Jan 5th, 2013 at 7:49pm: Get a load of this 1903 athropogenic climate change athropogenic climate change was rife in those days, so was co2 Temps from 44 degrees right up to 50.5 degrees (in Goodooga) in 1903 http://stevengoddard.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/screenhunter_376-jan-04-19-38.jpg Thanks to Steve Goddard http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2013/01/05/110-years-ago-today-123-degrees-in-australia/ Wonder if BOM cleaned these records out Goodooga 50.5 degrees http://maps.google.com.au/maps?hl=en&sugexp=les%3B&gs_rn=1&gs_ri=hp&cp=6&gs_id=u&xhr=t&q=goodooga&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.&bvm=bv.1355534169,d.dGY&bpcl=40096503&biw=1920&bih=952&wrapid=tljp1357380985808012&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wl Mount Drysdale 50 degrees http://maps.google.com.au/maps?hl=en&q=mount+drysdale&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.&bvm=bv.1355534169,d.dGY&bpcl=40096503&biw=1920&bih=952&wrapid=tlif135737937971310&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wl Yes.  THere have been very hot weather events in the past. Is there a point to this? not just hot - HOTTER. a lot hotter. but just like the MWP you simply ignore it and say it didnt happen

Please provide evidence to support your statement:

"actually glaciers have stopped recending,"

or apologise for trying to lie to the forum.

Why do you think anyone will take you seriously when you get caught red-handed telling lies - and then run away when asked to explain yourself?

adelcrow wrote on Jan 4^th, 2013 at 6:18pm:

Its the hottest day in Hobart since records have been taken and one of the hottest in Adelaide....yep the planet is cooling just like the deniers said it would  ;D

LOL

It's summer you dam moron. ::)

FriYAY wrote on Jan 6^th, 2013 at 11:09am:

adelcrow wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 6:18pm: Its the hottest day in Hobart since records have been taken and one of the hottest in Adelaide....yep the planet is cooling just like the deniers said it would  ;D LOL It's summer you dam moron. ::)

be fair... remember that climatologists liek Michael Mann actually have the audacity to use summer temperatures and put them on a graph composed of annual averages and then declare unprecedented warming.

FriYAY wrote on Jan 6^th, 2013 at 11:09am:

adelcrow wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 6:18pm: Its the hottest day in Hobart since records have been taken and one of the hottest in Adelaide....yep the planet is cooling just like the deniers said it would  ;D LOL It's summer you dam moron. ::)

A single weather event cant be blamed on global warming. We've had heat waves in the past and we'll have them in the future. Global warming is about the long term trend over decades.

You can't just cherry pick your weather events, thats as bad as the current lie doing the rounds that global warming stopped 16 years ago.  ;D It shows a complete ignorance of how global warming works.

The world has gotten colder on the East Coast of China:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-01-06/ships-trapped-in-ice-after-china-cold-snap/4454140


Quote:

Temperatures in China have plunged to their lowest in almost three decades, cold enough to freeze coastal waters and trap 1,000 ships in ice, official media said at the weekend. Since late November the country has shivered at an average of minus 3.8 degrees Celsius - 1.3 degrees colder than the previous average, and the chilliest in 28 years, state news agency Xinhua said on Saturday, citing the China Meteorological Administration. Bitter cold has even frozen the sea in Laizhou Bay on the coast of Shandong province in the east, stranding nearly 1,000 ships, the China Daily newspaper reported.

The_Barnacle wrote on Jan 6^th, 2013 at 11:55am:

FriYAY wrote on Jan 6th, 2013 at 11:09am: adelcrow wrote on Jan 4th, 2013 at 6:18pm: Its the hottest day in Hobart since records have been taken and one of the hottest in Adelaide....yep the planet is cooling just like the deniers said it would  ;D LOL It's summer you dam moron. ::) A single weather event cant be blamed on global warming. We've had heat waves in the past and we'll have them in the future. Global warming is about the long term trend over decades. You can't just cherry pick your weather events, thats as bad as the current lie doing the rounds that global warming stopped 16 years ago.  ;D It shows a complete ignorance of how global warming works.

please remember that the next time the alarmists point to some weather or hurricane or whatever and call it gobal warming.

and liek it or not - even the alarmists admit that the last 16 years has had no significant warming.

rabbitoh07 wrote on Jan 6^th, 2013 at 9:09am:

gold_medal wrote on Jan 6th, 2013 at 7:52am: rabbitoh07 wrote on Jan 5th, 2013 at 8:44pm: progressiveslol wrote on Jan 5th, 2013 at 7:49pm: Get a load of this 1903 athropogenic climate change athropogenic climate change was rife in those days, so was co2 Temps from 44 degrees right up to 50.5 degrees (in Goodooga) in 1903 http://stevengoddard.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/screenhunter_376-jan-04-19-38.jpg Thanks to Steve Goddard http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2013/01/05/110-years-ago-today-123-degrees-in-australia/ Wonder if BOM cleaned these records out Goodooga 50.5 degrees http://maps.google.com.au/maps?hl=en&sugexp=les%3B&gs_rn=1&gs_ri=hp&cp=6&gs_id=u&xhr=t&q=goodooga&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.&bvm=bv.1355534169,d.dGY&bpcl=40096503&biw=1920&bih=952&wrapid=tljp1357380985808012&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wl Mount Drysdale 50 degrees http://maps.google.com.au/maps?hl=en&q=mount+drysdale&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.&bvm=bv.1355534169,d.dGY&bpcl=40096503&biw=1920&bih=952&wrapid=tlif135737937971310&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wl Yes.  THere have been very hot weather events in the past. Is there a point to this? not just hot - HOTTER. a lot hotter. but just like the MWP you simply ignore it and say it didnt happen Please provide evidence to support your statement: "actually glaciers have stopped recending," or apologise for trying to lie to the forum. Why do you think anyone will take you seriously when you get caught red-handed telling lies - and then run away when asked to explain yourself?

C'mon goodie. Are you making these things up or do you just uncritically accept what you read on the net?

MOTR wrote on Jan 6^th, 2013 at 12:06pm:

rabbitoh07 wrote on Jan 6th, 2013 at 9:09am: gold_medal wrote on Jan 6th, 2013 at 7:52am: rabbitoh07 wrote on Jan 5th, 2013 at 8:44pm: progressiveslol wrote on Jan 5th, 2013 at 7:49pm: Get a load of this 1903 athropogenic climate change athropogenic climate change was rife in those days, so was co2 Temps from 44 degrees right up to 50.5 degrees (in Goodooga) in 1903 http://stevengoddard.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/screenhunter_376-jan-04-19-38.jpg Thanks to Steve Goddard http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2013/01/05/110-years-ago-today-123-degrees-in-australia/ Wonder if BOM cleaned these records out Goodooga 50.5 degrees http://maps.google.com.au/maps?hl=en&sugexp=les%3B&gs_rn=1&gs_ri=hp&cp=6&gs_id=u&xhr=t&q=goodooga&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.&bvm=bv.1355534169,d.dGY&bpcl=40096503&biw=1920&bih=952&wrapid=tljp1357380985808012&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wl Mount Drysdale 50 degrees http://maps.google.com.au/maps?hl=en&q=mount+drysdale&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.&bvm=bv.1355534169,d.dGY&bpcl=40096503&biw=1920&bih=952&wrapid=tlif135737937971310&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wl Yes.  THere have been very hot weather events in the past. Is there a point to this? not just hot - HOTTER. a lot hotter. but just like the MWP you simply ignore it and say it didnt happen Please provide evidence to support your statement: "actually glaciers have stopped recending," or apologise for trying to lie to the forum. Why do you think anyone will take you seriously when you get caught red-handed telling lies - and then run away when asked to explain yourself? C'mon goodie. Are you making these things up or do you just uncritically accept what you read on the net?

oh how convenient.. u seem to have missed all the questions asked of yousSo here is that list again that you seems to think so unlikely to have published climate papers

Claude Allegre, former director of the Institute for the Study of the Earth, University of Paris;
J. Scott Armstrong, cofounder of the Journal of Forecasting and the International Journal of Forecasting;
Jan Breslow, head of the Laboratory of Biochemical Genetics and Metabolism, Rockefeller University;
Roger Cohen, fellow, American Physical Society;
Edward David, member, National Academy of Engineering and National Academy of Sciences;
William Happer, professor of physics, Princeton;
Michael Kelly, professor of technology, University of Cambridge, U.K.;
William Kininmonth, former head of climate research at the Australian Bureau of Meteorology;
Richard Lindzen, professor of atmospheric sciences, MIT;
James McGrath, professor of chemistry, Virginia Technical University;
Rodney Nichols, former president and CEO of the New York Academy of Sciences;
Burt Rutan, aerospace engineer, designer of Voyager and SpaceShipOne;
Harrison H. Schmitt, Apollo 17 astronaut and former U.S. senator;
Nir Shaviv, professor of astrophysics, Hebrew University, Jerusalem;
Henk Tennekes, former director, Royal Dutch Meteorological Service;
Antonio Zichichi, president of the World Federation of Scientists, Geneva.

now tell me again why this rather prestigious group's opinion is worthless

The_Barnacle wrote on Jan 6^th, 2013 at 11:55am:

A single weather event cant be blamed on global warming.

Thats tantamount to blashpemy coming from a warmist isn't it?

gold_medal wrote on Jan 6^th, 2013 at 12:06pm:

please remember that the next time the alarmists point to some weather or hurricane or whatever and call it gobal warming.

It makes no difference to the AGW alarmists.  If it can be used to support their "argument" they will always treat 'global warming & climate change' and 'weather & climate' as interchangeable terms.

They have very little in the way of science to support their hypothesis, so semantics and colourful graphs are their weapons of choice.

gold_medal wrote on Jan 6^th, 2013 at 12:17pm:

MOTR wrote on Jan 6th, 2013 at 12:06pm: rabbitoh07 wrote on Jan 6th, 2013 at 9:09am: gold_medal wrote on Jan 6th, 2013 at 7:52am: rabbitoh07 wrote on Jan 5th, 2013 at 8:44pm: progressiveslol wrote on Jan 5th, 2013 at 7:49pm: Get a load of this 1903 athropogenic climate change athropogenic climate change was rife in those days, so was co2 Temps from 44 degrees right up to 50.5 degrees (in Goodooga) in 1903 http://stevengoddard.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/screenhunter_376-jan-04-19-38.jpg Thanks to Steve Goddard http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2013/01/05/110-years-ago-today-123-degrees-in-australia/ Wonder if BOM cleaned these records out Goodooga 50.5 degrees http://maps.google.com.au/maps?hl=en&sugexp=les%3B&gs_rn=1&gs_ri=hp&cp=6&gs_id=u&xhr=t&q=goodooga&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.&bvm=bv.1355534169,d.dGY&bpcl=40096503&biw=1920&bih=952&wrapid=tljp1357380985808012&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wl Mount Drysdale 50 degrees http://maps.google.com.au/maps?hl=en&q=mount+drysdale&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.&bvm=bv.1355534169,d.dGY&bpcl=40096503&biw=1920&bih=952&wrapid=tlif135737937971310&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wl Yes.  THere have been very hot weather events in the past. Is there a point to this? not just hot - HOTTER. a lot hotter. but just like the MWP you simply ignore it and say it didnt happen Please provide evidence to support your statement: "actually glaciers have stopped recending," or apologise for trying to lie to the forum. Why do you think anyone will take you seriously when you get caught red-handed telling lies - and then run away when asked to explain yourself? C'mon goodie. Are you making these things up or do you just uncritically accept what you read on the net? oh how convenient.. u seem to have missed all the questions asked of yousSo here is that list again that you seems to think so unlikely to have published climate papers Claude Allegre, former director of the Institute for the Study of the Earth, University of Paris; J. Scott Armstrong, cofounder of the Journal of Forecasting and the International Journal of Forecasting; Jan Breslow, head of the Laboratory of Biochemical Genetics and Metabolism, Rockefeller University; Roger Cohen, fellow, American Physical Society; Edward David, member, National Academy of Engineering and National Academy of Sciences; William Happer, professor of physics, Princeton; Michael Kelly, professor of technology, University of Cambridge, U.K.; William Kininmonth, former head of climate research at the Australian Bureau of Meteorology; Richard Lindzen, professor of atmospheric sciences, MIT; James McGrath, professor of chemistry, Virginia Technical University; Rodney Nichols, former president and CEO of the New York Academy of Sciences; Burt Rutan, aerospace engineer, designer of Voyager and SpaceShipOne; Harrison H. Schmitt, Apollo 17 astronaut and former U.S. senator; Nir Shaviv, professor of astrophysics, Hebrew University, Jerusalem; Henk Tennekes, former director, Royal Dutch Meteorological Service; Antonio Zichichi, president of the World Federation of Scientists, Geneva. now tell me again why this rather prestigious group's opinion is worthless

Stop trying to change the subject.  You need to explain why you told lies first.

Please provide evidence to support your statement:

[url]"actually glaciers have stopped recending,"[/url]

or apologise for trying to lie to the forum.

How many times are you going to run away from this question?
Do you really think you can just tell lies and get away with it?

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 6^th, 2013 at 1:30pm:

gold_medal wrote on Jan 6th, 2013 at 12:06pm: please remember that the next time the alarmists point to some weather or hurricane or whatever and call it gobal warming. It makes no difference to the AGW alarmists.  If it can be used to support their "argument" they will always treat 'global warming & climate change' and 'weather & climate' as interchangeable terms. They have very little in the way of science to support their hypothesis, so semantics and colourful graphs are their weapons of choice.

I personally like the 'its warmer therefore AGW and its cooler therefore AGW plus my personal fav its drought therefore AGw along with its raining heavy therefore AGW'

in marketing terms the ACC hysterics are doing a wondreful job. Its like selling pet rocks. There will always be people wanting them and believing that are alive.

rabbitoh07 wrote on Jan 6^th, 2013 at 1:51pm:

gold_medal wrote on Jan 6th, 2013 at 12:17pm: MOTR wrote on Jan 6th, 2013 at 12:06pm: rabbitoh07 wrote on Jan 6th, 2013 at 9:09am: gold_medal wrote on Jan 6th, 2013 at 7:52am: rabbitoh07 wrote on Jan 5th, 2013 at 8:44pm: progressiveslol wrote on Jan 5th, 2013 at 7:49pm: Get a load of this 1903 athropogenic climate change athropogenic climate change was rife in those days, so was co2 Temps from 44 degrees right up to 50.5 degrees (in Goodooga) in 1903 http://stevengoddard.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/screenhunter_376-jan-04-19-38.jpg Thanks to Steve Goddard http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2013/01/05/110-years-ago-today-123-degrees-in-australia/ Wonder if BOM cleaned these records out Goodooga 50.5 degrees http://maps.google.com.au/maps?hl=en&sugexp=les%3B&gs_rn=1&gs_ri=hp&cp=6&gs_id=u&xhr=t&q=goodooga&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.&bvm=bv.1355534169,d.dGY&bpcl=40096503&biw=1920&bih=952&wrapid=tljp1357380985808012&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wl Mount Drysdale 50 degrees http://maps.google.com.au/maps?hl=en&q=mount+drysdale&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.&bvm=bv.1355534169,d.dGY&bpcl=40096503&biw=1920&bih=952&wrapid=tlif135737937971310&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wl Yes.  THere have been very hot weather events in the past. Is there a point to this? not just hot - HOTTER. a lot hotter. but just like the MWP you simply ignore it and say it didnt happen Please provide evidence to support your statement: "actually glaciers have stopped recending," or apologise for trying to lie to the forum. Why do you think anyone will take you seriously when you get caught red-handed telling lies - and then run away when asked to explain yourself? C'mon goodie. Are you making these things up or do you just uncritically accept what you read on the net? oh how convenient.. u seem to have missed all the questions asked of yousSo here is that list again that you seems to think so unlikely to have published climate papers Claude Allegre, former director of the Institute for the Study of the Earth, University of Paris; J. Scott Armstrong, cofounder of the Journal of Forecasting and the International Journal of Forecasting; Jan Breslow, head of the Laboratory of Biochemical Genetics and Metabolism, Rockefeller University; Roger Cohen, fellow, American Physical Society; Edward David, member, National Academy of Engineering and National Academy of Sciences; William Happer, professor of physics, Princeton; Michael Kelly, professor of technology, University of Cambridge, U.K.; William Kininmonth, former head of climate research at the Australian Bureau of Meteorology; Richard Lindzen, professor of atmospheric sciences, MIT; James McGrath, professor of chemistry, Virginia Technical University; Rodney Nichols, former president and CEO of the New York Academy of Sciences; Burt Rutan, aerospace engineer, designer of Voyager and SpaceShipOne; Harrison H. Schmitt, Apollo 17 astronaut and former U.S. senator; Nir Shaviv, professor of astrophysics, Hebrew University, Jerusalem; Henk Tennekes, former director, Royal Dutch Meteorological Service; Antonio Zichichi, president of the World Federation of Scientists, Geneva. now tell me again why this rather prestigious group's opinion is worthless Stop trying to change the subject.  You need to explain why you told lies first. Please provide evidence to support your statement: [url]"actually glaciers have stopped recending,"[/url] or apologise for trying to lie to the forum. How many times are you going to run away from this question? Do you really think you can just tell lies and get away with it?

The subject DUMB-BUNNY is global warming - a topic you refuse to address because the preoponderance of eveidence proferred here disproves it. If you were half the person you thin kyou are you would answer the questions put forward liek the above one.

gold_medal wrote on Jan 6^th, 2013 at 4:01pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 6th, 2013 at 1:30pm: gold_medal wrote on Jan 6th, 2013 at 12:06pm: please remember that the next time the alarmists point to some weather or hurricane or whatever and call it gobal warming. It makes no difference to the AGW alarmists.  If it can be used to support their "argument" they will always treat 'global warming & climate change' and 'weather & climate' as interchangeable terms. They have very little in the way of science to support their hypothesis, so semantics and colourful graphs are their weapons of choice. I personally like the 'its warmer therefore AGW and its cooler therefore AGW plus my personal fav its drought therefore AGw along with its raining heavy therefore AGW' in marketing terms the ACC hysterics are doing a wondreful job. Its like selling pet rocks. There will always be people wanting them and believing that are alive.

Wow, just wow, talk about dumb, lucky confusionalists are a dying breed.

gold_medal wrote on Jan 6^th, 2013 at 4:01pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 6th, 2013 at 1:30pm: gold_medal wrote on Jan 6th, 2013 at 12:06pm: please remember that the next time the alarmists point to some weather or hurricane or whatever and call it gobal warming. It makes no difference to the AGW alarmists.  If it can be used to support their "argument" they will always treat 'global warming & climate change' and 'weather & climate' as interchangeable terms. They have very little in the way of science to support their hypothesis, so semantics and colourful graphs are their weapons of choice. I personally like the 'its warmer therefore AGW and its cooler therefore AGW plus my personal fav its drought therefore AGw along with its raining heavy therefore AGW' in marketing terms the ACC hysterics are doing a wondreful job. Its like selling pet rocks. There will always be people wanting them and believing that are alive.

Yep, their religion is called AGW (Anthropogenic Global Warming) yet if anything other than warming is discussed they immediately change their tune to "climate change".

The problem is, they are so frightened by the preachings of this religion that they have lost all capacity to think rationally.  It's sad to see so many people scared so utterly senseless.

skippy. wrote on Jan 6^th, 2013 at 4:11pm:

gold_medal wrote on Jan 6th, 2013 at 4:01pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 6th, 2013 at 1:30pm: gold_medal wrote on Jan 6th, 2013 at 12:06pm: please remember that the next time the alarmists point to some weather or hurricane or whatever and call it gobal warming. It makes no difference to the AGW alarmists.  If it can be used to support their "argument" they will always treat 'global warming & climate change' and 'weather & climate' as interchangeable terms. They have very little in the way of science to support their hypothesis, so semantics and colourful graphs are their weapons of choice. I personally like the 'its warmer therefore AGW and its cooler therefore AGW plus my personal fav its drought therefore AGw along with its raining heavy therefore AGW' in marketing terms the ACC hysterics are doing a wondreful job. Its like selling pet rocks. There will always be people wanting them and believing that are alive. Wow, just wow, talk about dumb, lucky confusionalists are a dying breed.

actually, dopey, the sceptics are winning the debate and the fight for public opinion. The majority no longer believes are are to blame for warming. Probably the lack of it happening isn't helping!

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 6^th, 2013 at 4:16pm:

gold_medal wrote on Jan 6th, 2013 at 4:01pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 6th, 2013 at 1:30pm: gold_medal wrote on Jan 6th, 2013 at 12:06pm: please remember that the next time the alarmists point to some weather or hurricane or whatever and call it gobal warming. It makes no difference to the AGW alarmists.  If it can be used to support their "argument" they will always treat 'global warming & climate change' and 'weather & climate' as interchangeable terms. They have very little in the way of science to support their hypothesis, so semantics and colourful graphs are their weapons of choice. I personally like the 'its warmer therefore AGW and its cooler therefore AGW plus my personal fav its drought therefore AGw along with its raining heavy therefore AGW' in marketing terms the ACC hysterics are doing a wondreful job. Its like selling pet rocks. There will always be people wanting them and believing that are alive. Yep, their religion is called AGW (Anthropogenic Global Warming) yet if anything other than warming is discussed they immediately change their tune to "climate change". The problem is, they are so frightened by the preachings of this religion that they have lost all capacity to think rationally.  It's sad to see so many people scared so utterly senseless.

there certainly is a lack of rational thinking. But worse, there is a high degree of blatant manipulation of data, false reports, fraud and intimidation. Science is getting a bloody nose from this because ultimately other disciplines are going to look liek the schmucks that climate scientist are looking like now. Where every other discipline openly accepts and asks for criticism, climate science does the reverse.

gold_medal wrote on Jan 6^th, 2013 at 4:32pm:

actually, dopey, the sceptics are winning the debate ...

That's because the sceptics are willing to actually have a debate.

The AGW alarmists think there's no need for debate.  They refuse to give serious consideration to anything that goes against their hypothesis and they come out with ridiculous statements like "it's beyond doubt".

They abandon all scientific reasoning and instead cling to their hypothesis with nothing more than faith (based on irrational fear).

gold_medal wrote on Jan 6^th, 2013 at 4:32pm:

skippy. wrote on Jan 6th, 2013 at 4:11pm: gold_medal wrote on Jan 6th, 2013 at 4:01pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 6th, 2013 at 1:30pm: gold_medal wrote on Jan 6th, 2013 at 12:06pm: please remember that the next time the alarmists point to some weather or hurricane or whatever and call it gobal warming. It makes no difference to the AGW alarmists.  If it can be used to support their "argument" they will always treat 'global warming & climate change' and 'weather & climate' as interchangeable terms. They have very little in the way of science to support their hypothesis, so semantics and colourful graphs are their weapons of choice. I personally like the 'its warmer therefore AGW and its cooler therefore AGW plus my personal fav its drought therefore AGw along with its raining heavy therefore AGW' in marketing terms the ACC hysterics are doing a wondreful job. Its like selling pet rocks. There will always be people wanting them and believing that are alive. Wow, just wow, talk about dumb, lucky confusionalists are a dying breed. actually, dopey, the sceptics are winning the debate and the fight for public opinion. The majority no longer believes are are to blame for warming. Probably the lack of it happening isn't helping!

LIAR show me one opinion poll that supports your lies? Or it's just more bullshi t  from a sad old man of questionable character.

gold_medal wrote on Jan 6^th, 2013 at 4:35pm:

Where every other discipline openly accepts and asks for criticism, climate science does the reverse.

Exactly!

gold_medal wrote on Jan 6^th, 2013 at 4:03pm:

The subject DUMB-BUNNY is global warming - a topic you refuse to address because the preoponderance of eveidence proferred here disproves it. If you were half the person you thin kyou are you would answer the questions put forward liek the above one.

Yes - and in trying to make a point - you told an outright lie.

You wrote:
"actually glaciers have stopped recending,"

Please provide evidence to support that statement or apologise for lying to the forum.

NB - that was only the first of several factually incorrect statements you made in post #39 of this thread:
http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1357287527/39#39

But since you have a habit of running away from direct questions - we will address these one at a time.  You have been shown that your statement was incorrect and you have been asked over and over again to provide evidence to support your statement.

Since you are incapable of providing any evidence whatsoever to support your statement - we can only assume you are a liar.

Now - Please provide evidence to support your statement :

"actually glaciers have stopped recending,"

When you have either done that or apologised to the forum for telling lies - then we will move onto the other factually incorrect statements you have been making.

We are waiting

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 6^th, 2013 at 4:42pm:

gold_medal wrote on Jan 6th, 2013 at 4:35pm: Where every other discipline openly accepts and asks for criticism, climate science does the reverse. Exactly!

Really Greggery?

Why do you say that?

Did Alan Jones tell you that?

Could you tell us which journals have stopped accepting papers relating to climate science?
Please name them.

rabbitoh07 wrote on Jan 6^th, 2013 at 4:42pm:

... we can only assume you are a liar.

We know for a fact that you're a liar Bunny Boy.

"beyond doubt" was a big fat lie, and you kept repeating it.

You really should stop throwing those stones around in your glass house Bunny.

rabbitoh07 wrote on Jan 6^th, 2013 at 4:45pm:

Really Greggery? Why do you say that?

Yes Bunny, really: because it's true.

You're a perfect example.  Or are you?

We can answer that question now, quite easily, with another question:

Do you accept that there's a possibility that the AGW hypothesis could be wrong, and that one day it could be replaced with another "currently accepted hypothesis"?

'Yes' or 'No'?  Simple question.

rabbitoh07 wrote on Jan 6^th, 2013 at 4:45pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 6th, 2013 at 4:42pm: gold_medal wrote on Jan 6th, 2013 at 4:35pm: Where every other discipline openly accepts and asks for criticism, climate science does the reverse. Exactly! Really Greggery? Why do you say that? Did Alan Jones tell you that? Could you tell us which journals have stopped accepting papers relating to climate science? Please name them.

Nature - unless it supports ACC

are you that uninformed or one-eyed that you arent aware of the argument raging ovr gatea-keeping at some scientific journals?? did you even read some of those CRU emails?

you are remarkably uninformed

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 6^th, 2013 at 4:42pm:

gold_medal wrote on Jan 6th, 2013 at 4:35pm: Where every other discipline openly accepts and asks for criticism, climate science does the reverse. Exactly!

I am working on a papaer I hope will be published in a scientific journal (if I ever finish it). My previous writings and book have been debated and criticisde openly and I am taking some of that criticism on board to build a better hypothesis and new paper.

Thats how real science works.

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 6^th, 2013 at 4:52pm:

rabbitoh07 wrote on Jan 6th, 2013 at 4:45pm: Really Greggery? Why do you say that? Yes Bunny, really: because it's true. You're a perfect example.  Or are you? We can answer that question now, quite easily, with another question: Do you accept that there's a possibility that the AGW hypothesis could be wrong, and that one day it could be replaced with another "currently accepted hypothesis"? 'Yes' or 'No'?  Simple question.

ouch... this should be good.

rabbitoh07 wrote on Jan 6^th, 2013 at 4:45pm:

Did Alan Jones tell you that?

Childish (incorrect) assumption there Bunny.

I'm a lefty: on the far left actually.

Why would I be listening to a demented right wing broadcaster?

Stick to the facts Bunny: lies and assumptions are making you look very silly.

gold_medal wrote on Jan 6^th, 2013 at 4:01pm:

I personally like the 'its warmer therefore AGW and its cooler therefore AGW plus my personal fav its drought therefore AGw along with its raining heavy therefore AGW'

What is it you don't understand about this?

Do you have any understanding of how weather and climate works? From your statement above, I assume not - so I will try to keep things simple for you.

"Weather" is essentially what we see as a result of atmospheric temperature and pressure diffentials.  If you add more energy to the system - the differences in temperature and pressure increase.  More heat energy in the system also means more evaporation.  And warmer air has the ability to hold more water vapour than colder air.

So - what a warmer atmosphere means, is that climate has greater variability.  Generally - the dry times in dry places will become drier.  The wet times in wet places will become wetter.  And extremes of temperature and precipitation will become more frequent.

If you have any specific questions I would be happy to answer them for you.

gold_medal wrote on Jan 6^th, 2013 at 4:55pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 6th, 2013 at 4:42pm: gold_medal wrote on Jan 6th, 2013 at 4:35pm: Where every other discipline openly accepts and asks for criticism, climate science does the reverse. Exactly! I am working on a papaer I hope will be published in a scientific journal (if I ever finish it). My previous writings and book have been debated and criticisde openly and I am taking some of that criticism on board to build a better hypothesis and new paper. Thats how real science works.

I hope you use a spell check on that paper?  ;D

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 6^th, 2013 at 4:57pm:

rabbitoh07 wrote on Jan 6th, 2013 at 4:45pm: Did Alan Jones tell you that? Childish (incorrect) assumption there Bunny. I'm a lefty: on the far left actually. Why would I be listening to a demented right wing broadcaster? Stick to the facts Bunny: lies and assumptions are making you look very silly.

I assume you would be listening to a demented right wing broadcaster because you sound exactly like a demented right wing broadcaster.

You claimed that "Where every other discipline openly accepts and asks for criticism, climate science does the reverse."

Could you tell us which journals have stopped accepting papers relating to climate science?
Please name them.

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 6^th, 2013 at 4:52pm:

rabbitoh07 wrote on Jan 6th, 2013 at 4:45pm: Really Greggery? Why do you say that? Yes Bunny, really: because it's true. You're a perfect example.  Or are you? We can answer that question now, quite easily, with another question: Do you accept that there's a possibility that the AGW hypothesis could be wrong, and that one day it could be replaced with another "currently accepted hypothesis"? 'Yes' or 'No'?  Simple question.

Yes

Bobby. wrote on Jan 6^th, 2013 at 5:02pm:

gold_medal wrote on Jan 6th, 2013 at 4:55pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 6th, 2013 at 4:42pm: gold_medal wrote on Jan 6th, 2013 at 4:35pm: Where every other discipline openly accepts and asks for criticism, climate science does the reverse. Exactly! I am working on a papaer I hope will be published in a scientific journal (if I ever finish it). My previous writings and book have been debated and criticisde openly and I am taking some of that criticism on board to build a better hypothesis and new paper. Thats how real science works. I hope you use a spell check on that paper?  ;D

Hes gonna get Alan Jones to proof read it for him  :D

gold_medal wrote on Jan 6^th, 2013 at 4:56pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 6th, 2013 at 4:52pm: rabbitoh07 wrote on Jan 6th, 2013 at 4:45pm: Really Greggery? Why do you say that? Yes Bunny, really: because it's true. You're a perfect example.  Or are you? We can answer that question now, quite easily, with another question: Do you accept that there's a possibility that the AGW hypothesis could be wrong, and that one day it could be replaced with another "currently accepted hypothesis"? 'Yes' or 'No'?  Simple question. ouch... this should be good.

Unfortunately, I don't think he has the intestinal fortitude to answer the question with a simple 'yes' or 'no'.


But we'll give him another chance:

So Bunny, is there any possibility at all that the AGW hypothesis might be incorrect?  Yes, or No?  Simple question.

gold_medal wrote on Jan 6^th, 2013 at 4:55pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 6th, 2013 at 4:42pm: gold_medal wrote on Jan 6th, 2013 at 4:35pm: Where every other discipline openly accepts and asks for criticism, climate science does the reverse. Exactly! I am working on a papaer I hope will be published in a scientific journal (if I ever finish it). My previous writings and book have been debated and criticisde openly and I am taking some of that criticism on board to build a better hypothesis and new paper. Thats how real science works.

Ha ha  ha  ha  ha  ha  ha  ha  ha  ha v!!!!!!!!! ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
Who do you think you are fooling?!?!?

Who would be interested in reading the opinions of a liar?

A liar who is completely clueless about the subject he is trying to discuss?!?!?!


We haven't forgotten the lies you told.

We are still waiting for an explanation.

Let's start with the first one:
You wrote:
"actually glaciers have stopped recending,"

Please provide evidence to support that statement or apologise for lying to the forum.

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 6^th, 2013 at 5:07pm:

gold_medal wrote on Jan 6th, 2013 at 4:56pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 6th, 2013 at 4:52pm: rabbitoh07 wrote on Jan 6th, 2013 at 4:45pm: Really Greggery? Why do you say that? Yes Bunny, really: because it's true. You're a perfect example.  Or are you? We can answer that question now, quite easily, with another question: Do you accept that there's a possibility that the AGW hypothesis could be wrong, and that one day it could be replaced with another "currently accepted hypothesis"? 'Yes' or 'No'?  Simple question. ouch... this should be good. Unfortunately, I don't think he has the intestinal fortitude to answer the question with a simple 'yes' or 'no'. But we'll give him another chance: So Bunny, is there any possibility at all that the AGW hypothesis might be incorrect?  Yes, or No?  Simple question.

look up

rabbitoh07 wrote on Jan 6^th, 2013 at 5:03pm:

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 6th, 2013 at 4:52pm: rabbitoh07 wrote on Jan 6th, 2013 at 4:45pm: Really Greggery? Why do you say that? Yes Bunny, really: because it's true. You're a perfect example.  Or are you? We can answer that question now, quite easily, with another question: Do you accept that there's a possibility that the AGW hypothesis could be wrong, and that one day it could be replaced with another "currently accepted hypothesis"? 'Yes' or 'No'?  Simple question. Yes

Ah!

I take back the "intestinal fortitude" comment then.

You have finally gained my respect.

Well done.

If only other disciples were as honest as you.

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 6^th, 2013 at 5:07pm:

gold_medal wrote on Jan 6th, 2013 at 4:56pm: greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 6th, 2013 at 4:52pm: rabbitoh07 wrote on Jan 6th, 2013 at 4:45pm: Really Greggery? Why do you say that? Yes Bunny, really: because it's true. You're a perfect example.  Or are you? We can answer that question now, quite easily, with another question: Do you accept that there's a possibility that the AGW hypothesis could be wrong, and that one day it could be replaced with another "currently accepted hypothesis"? 'Yes' or 'No'?  Simple question. ouch... this should be good. Unfortunately, I don't think he has the intestinal fortitude to answer the question with a simple 'yes' or 'no'. But we'll give him another chance: So Bunny, is there any possibility at all that the AGW hypothesis might be incorrect?  Yes, or No?  Simple question.

Even if its 50/50 (which it isn't) only a fool would keep pumping pollution into the atmosphere just because they don't have the courage to admit they could be wrong.

greggerypeccary wrote on Jan 6^th, 2013 at 5:07pm:

Unfortunately, I don't think he has the intestinal fortitude to answer the question with a simple 'yes' or 'no'.

Where is your "intestinal fortitude" Greggery?

You claimed that "Where every other discipline openly accepts and asks for criticism, climate science does the reverse."

Could you tell us which journals have stopped accepting papers relating to climate science?
Please name them.

Simple question

And there was another simple question your didn't answer.  Your wrote:
The terms AGW and climate change are not interchangeable.  AGW alarmists think they are.

Who are these "AGW alarmists" that think the terms AGW and climate change are interchangeable?

I asked you to name them.  Give us an example. You did not have the "intestinal fortitude" to answer Greggery.

I can answer your questions Greggery.  Why can't you answer mine?