2015 Already Setting Heat Records

Here's the data that some claim does not exist:



It actually goes back a lot farther than this, but I had to cut it off somewhere.

 

They don't need to. In the July 2013 ruling denying dismissal of the lawsuit, the Judge states that Michael Mann's work is sound and that "reference to Plaintiff as a fraud is a misstatement of fact." The lawsuit isn't questioning the validity of global warming or even the hockey stick, but weather there was any malice behind the personal attacks on Mann.

 

This is awesome. Gazi's (global socialist) claim that Mount St Helens made .01 giga tons of crap while mankind makes that in 2.5 hours. So according to you people, mankind is like having 10 Mount St Helens go off a day. Earth would look like Venus. You are wrong.

 

Yep, like I said, a judge that has no clue about the science. Mann used Briffa tree rings and even Briffa has condemned Mann's use of them. You would think Briffa would file a brief in favor of Mann, wouldn't you?

 

Here's the global CO2 record since 1958:



Maybe you can point out the big spike in 1980 from the Mt. St. Helens eruption. No? How about the spike in 1982 from El Chichon? Still drawing a blank? Well then, certainly we should see a big big jump from the biggest of them all, Pinatubo in 1991. Right?

I guess not. Looks like those volcanoes are simply insignificant compared to human activity. Damn that data! Why isn't the data Republican????

 

To the AGW/CC worshipers, uncertainty can not be proven so it doesn't exist!

 

If Mount St Helens can effect global temp by .1c imagine 10 of them going off a day.

 

Because seasons are reversed between northern and southern hemispheres, that will never happen. It's always winter somewhere.

Your memory is faulty. Gore never made such a prediction. He was reporting (accurately) on a single worst-case projection made by a single scientist, and not concerning the globe as a whole, but only the Arctic. And only in summer.

Judging by the latest PIOMAS data, we've got about 20 years, plus or minus 10, until we see an ice-free Arctic ocean in the summer. That's in line with most other projections that have been around for years.

 

except when Dinosaurs were around and the global temp was 17c higher. Which is the temp the Earth will return to in like a million years.

Ya, your right. He made the prediction in 2006

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GPLD8aylRiw

I just checked, we still got ice caps.... SCIENCE!!!!

so in 10 to 30 years we'll have no ice. I'm gunna go make a doomsday clock.

 

by the way, heres an evil republican graph.

View attachment 34997

 

Really? If science isn't so hard, then why do we need scientists?

 

From the video, Gore says one study estimates arctic ice could be gone in 22 years while another says as little as 7 years. That means sometime between 2014 and 2029. I wonder where they could have gotten that idea?

 

if it was "science" it could be proven. 2+2=4, is science, so is e=mc2. its not 2+2= 10-30 years

 

somethin tells me not much is gunna change by 2029 but i'll set up the doomsday clock so u ppl can start building your global warming bunkers

 

Proof is for mathematics and alcohol. 2+2=4 is math, not science. Science is about finding the best explanation for a given phenomena, and it has never proven anything. Just look at Newton's Laws of Motion.

 

i did some checking, theres some debate on this these days. pretty much anything is science now. It's a sad these days, but I feel it's a trend.

yup, anything goes for science now. U can find scienetist that disagree? But they are both right because it's "science". Newton worked hard to "prove" his theorys as "science"

 

Newton's proof lasted a little over 200 years until Einstein introduced relativity. It doesn't mean Newton was wrong, just that there was a better explanation. We already know that relativity is incomplete and will eventually be replaced by a better theory. Science never proves anything.

 

interesting point
ever heard of dna testing?
in court they always quote the probability related to the match

and there is the Heisenberg uncertainty principle

and if you have a moment could you tell me if a photon behaves as a wave or a particle

or whether it was science when professor higgs predicted the higgs boson 40 years ago

and as regards to newton, he did few experiments . he suggested hypothesis to explain the physical world then other scientists did years of research validating his work which actually proved little or nothing

 

so in 2029, we'll have whole new guesses on how long the ice caps will be here

 

Nothing in science is ever "proven". Science is always open to new data and new ideas. Science proceeds by falsifying what is untrue, not by proving what is true.

That's math, and like all math, it depends on a set of unproven axioms.

Also unproven. It is accepted because there is a mountain of evidence supporting it. Just as there is a mountain of evidence supporting anthropogenic climate change.

 

Evidently from poor models.



- - - Updated - - -

Which axiom?

 

Euclid's first axiom: things that are equal to the same thing are also equal to each other.