July, 2915 hottest on record

LOL, the alarmism and smearing continue.

Here is the smoking gun for Roy Spencer so he doesn't receive any money but by golly, he is not saying the right politically correct things so he is working for the oil industry. That is how crazy the alarmists have become.

http://www.southernstudies.org/2011...ontrarian-roy-spencers-oil-industry-ties.html

And of course the billions pumped in by government have no effect whatsoever. What a hoot.

 

Strawman, more logical fallacies. You define the answer in your question. Sorry you don't really know what is going on.

 

Joseph Bast isn't a scientist. Willie Soon got no money directly for anything as it goes though, thoroughly vetted, by the Smithsonian which is public knowledge that does not matter to the alarmist smear campaign. Lehr is a geologist and not in climate science, and Anthony Watts is a blogger like your favorite cartoonist, John Cook.

Yet you say you know the faux Nobel Laureate Michael Mann. Family?

 

he's an economist

don't you ever get tired of having your excuses refuted?


Work of prominent climate change denier was funded by energy industry

"Over the last 14 years Willie Soon, a researcher at the Harvard-Smithsonian Centre for Astrophysics, received a total of $1.25m from Exxon Mobil, Southern Company, the American Petroleum Institute (API) and a foundation run by the ultra-conservative Koch brothers, the documents obtained by Greenpeace through freedom of information filings show."

he's an unethical scientist

he studied meteorology at purdue

we correspond on the internet

 

Facts not your thing eh? BTW, you make claims without ever backing them up and now you say you correspond with a liar that sues anyone and everyone that questions his practices. Priceless.

 

notice how i include facts in my comments

you can't seem to get anything right

no, i said i correspond with mann, because i do

 

than why does ISIS want to destroy humans if we all flock together. You and your cumba ya stuff.

 

they think they're better than everyone. LOL. Ask them.

 

"may", and why is it it would go up 1.0C? doubling of CO2 which we haven't done yet. still no evidence of disastrous events. NONE.

 

Facts? you? you wouldn't know what a fact looks like. Dude, you have never once provided facts, every graph is altered, EVERYONE!!!! But hey I'm not going to let your facts destroy life.

 

what a joke

 

I know, when will you provide an actual fact?

 

i've been doing it for quite some time now

 

what forum? hasn't been on here.

Post up that fudged data temperature graph. LOL.

 

you really don't know what you're talking about

here are the facts, again:



Global temperature rise

All three major global surface temperature reconstructions show that Earth has warmed since 1880.(5) Most of this warming has occurred since the 1970s, with the 20 warmest years having occurred since 1981 and with all 10 of the warmest years occurring in the past 12 years.(6) Even though the 2000s witnessed a solar output decline resulting in an unusually deep solar minimum in 2007-2009, surface temperatures continue to increase.(7)


5) - https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/indicators/

6) - T.C. Peterson et.al., "State of the Climate in 2008," Special Supplement to the Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, v. 90, no. 8, August 2009, pp. S17-S18.

7) - I. Allison et.al., The Copenhagen Diagnosis: Updating the World on the Latest Climate Science, UNSW Climate Change Research Center, Sydney, Australia, 2009, p. 11

 

and why do you believe these are facts? I would like to see the reports form 1000 years ago.

Edit: BTW, the big word in there is 'Reconstruction', do you know what that means? It means it's fudged, exactly what I stated dude.

 

i know what a fact is, so do nasa, noaa and the ncdc

what's stopping you?

 

I never claimed anything was a fact you did. Prove it, post up the 1000 year old report.

 

i said, "here are the facts" and posted some

try reading them

 

I did, and the material isn't a fact. comprehenda?

 

me, nasa, noaa and the ncdc say it's a fact; guess who carries the most weight

yes, i understand that you don't know what you're talking about

 

link from space ref;
http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewpr.html?pid=30000

Excerpt:
"NASA Caught in Climate Data Manipulation; New Revelations Headlined on KUSI-TV Climate Special

Press Release From: KUSI-TV
Posted: Thursday, January 14, 2010

Climate researchers have discovered that NASA researchers improperly manipulated data in order to claim 2005 as "THE WARMEST YEAR ON RECORD." KUSI-TV meteorologist, Weather Channel founder, and iconic weatherman John Coleman will present these findings in a one-hour special airing on KUSI-TV on Jan.14 at 9 p.m. A related report will be made available on the Internet at 6 p.m. EST on January 14th at www.kusi.com.

In a new report, computer expert E. Michael Smith and Certified Consulting Meteorologist Joseph D'Aleo discovered extensive manipulation of the temperature data by the U.S. Government's two primary climate centers: the National Climate Data Center (NCDC) in Ashville, North Carolina and the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) at Columbia University in New York City. Smith and D'Aleo accuse these centers of manipulating temperature data to give the appearance of warmer temperatures than actually occurred by trimming the number and location of weather observation stations. The report is available online at http://icecap.us/images/uploads/NOAAroleinclimategate.pdf."

 

again with the jokes, try to keep up, coleman is a paid liar

the vast majority of climate scientists agree on the data


"Heartland lost more than $825,000, or one third of planned corporate fundraising for the year. The shortfall led to sponsorship of the Institute's May 2012 climate conference by Illinois' coal lobby, the Illinois Coal Association, the Institute's "first publicly acknowledged donations from the coal industry," and the Heritage Foundation."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Heartland_Institute


"In retirement, Coleman remains busy. He has written a novel and screen play, designed two new APPs for cell phones and smart TV."

https://www.heartland.org/john-coleman


Why does anyone pay attention to John Coleman?


"Both Fox News and CNN have recently invited John Coleman, one of the founders of The Weather Channel and former TV meteorologist, to express his views about climate change to their national audiences. Coleman is simply an awful choice to discuss this issue. He lacks credentials, many of his statements about climate change completely lack substance or mislead, and I’m not even sure he knows what he actually believes.

Video: Coleman on CNN’s Reliable Sources November 2, followed by Weather Company (which owns The Weather Channel) CEO David Kenny

To begin, Coleman hasn’t published a single peer-reviewed paper pertaining to climate change science. His career, a successful and distinguished one, was in TV weather for over half a century, prior to his retirement in San Diego last April. He’s worked in the top markets: Chicago and New York, including a 7-year stint on Good Morning America when it launched. If you watch Coleman on-camera, his skill is obvious. He speaks with authority, injects an irreverent sense of humor and knows how to connect with his viewer.

But a climate scientist, he is not."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/capital-weather-gang/wp/2014/11/03/why-does-anyone-pay-attention-to-john-coleman-weather-channel-co-founder-on-climate-change/

 

sorry, facts is facts. John Coleman very respected Meteorologist

 

and as a climatologist he gets laughed at, because he isn't one