Arctic Cold Smashes October Records in the West, Plains

[AProudLefty]

Then why do you belittle the ones who say he may have been mentally unsound when you yourself agrees that what he said was wrong?

I don't think I said he was wrong.

 

[Surface Detail]

Probably because it's not true.

This is really basic stuff, Jack. Here's some reading for you if you'd like to learn a little more about SMB:

How the Greenland ice sheet fared in 2018

 

[Threegoofs]

As I have repeatedly explained, the SMB data are perfectly compatible with a warming Arctic. Warming increases precipitation as well as increasing surface melting, and if the former dominates, then the SMB increases. So the SMB data are perfectly compatible with a warming Arctic. I really don't know why you are having such a hard time understanding this!

“It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.”

 

[flogger]

Probably because it's not true.

Why is this of any consequence whatsoever given normal and quite natural climate variation over recent millennia ?

 

[AProudLefty]

Why is this of any consequence whatsoever given normal and quite natural climate variation over recent millennia ?

What is weird is why they are trying so hard to convince us that nothing will happen.

 

[flogger]

What is weird is why they are trying so hard to convince us that nothing will happen.

Many peer review studies seem to say otherwise. There is nothing wrong with todays climate ..... live with it :wink:

 

[AProudLefty]

Many peer review studies seem to say otherwise. There is nothing wrong with todays climate ..... live with it :wink:

True. It hasn't been that cold here lately. I guess I don't care as long as it's fine right now. :wink:

 

[Threegoofs]

Many peer review studies seem to say otherwise. There is nothing wrong with todays climate ..... live with it :wink:

Weird that the vast majority of guys who actually DO the peer review.... don’t say that at all.

 

[Individual]

Many peer review studies seem to say otherwise. There is nothing wrong with todays climate ..... live with it :wink:

Dress accordingly.

 

[Jack Hays]

This is really basic stuff, Jack. Here's some reading for you if you'd like to learn a little more about SMB:

How the Greenland ice sheet fared in 2018

Doesn't support your claim.

 

[Jack Hays]

Why is this of any consequence whatsoever given normal and quite natural climate variation over recent millennia ?

It's a minor tangent so he can avoid the main point. I'm humoring him.

 

[PoS]

I don't think I said he was wrong.

So you believe that Earth would turn into Venus then since Trump got out of the Paris Accord. Well, that explains a lot about you.

 

[flogger]

Weird that the vast majority of guys who actually DO the peer review.... don’t say that at all.

No they just take the coin :wink:

 

[Surface Detail]

No they just take the coin :wink:

Yeah, sure. All those scientists are paid to make up data by governments who then ignore the data they paid the scientists to make up. And all the scientists go along with this since, being highly qualified in a numerate discipline, they will do anything, no matter how dishonest, to keep their relatively low-paying jobs in research. And this will all be kept secret. Makes sense to me :roll:

 

[Threegoofs]

No they just take the coin :wink:

Peer review is done gratis- academics do it out of a sense of duty to science.

I’m sure you didn’t know that because the concept of doing something without a direct exchange of funds is alien to you, no doubt.

 

[vegas giants]

No they just take the coin :wink:

Clearly you are not familiar with peer review

 

[longview]

No they just take the coin :wink:

There is not direct money involved, that is why it is called pal review,
If you give my paper an easy review, I will give yours a friendly review!

 

[Threegoofs]

There is not direct money involved, that is why it is called pal review,
If you give my paper an easy review, I will give yours a friendly review!

Oh right.

The scientists are doing it for the money, but do it free.

And they anonymously approve each other’s work because academics is such a collegial enterprise.

You worked in a University, but you clearly weren’t faculty!

 

[Hari Seldon]

Arctic Cold Smashes October Records in the West, Plains | The Weather Channel



LOL... I wonder what the climate jihadists will say this time...

Have you seen what is going on in Australia.

 

[Glitch]

Unfortunately, we are all very aware of the peer-review process.

• "But is it peer reviewed?" - Fraud and Science - October, 2012;
• Science Journal Pulls 60 Papers in Peer-Review Fraud - July, 2014;
• Peer review is broken – Springer announces 64 papers retracted due to fake reviews - August, 2015;
• Peer Review Fraud on the Rise at Scientific Journals - October, 2015;
• 107 cancer papers retracted due to peer review fraud - April, 2017;
• Peer-Review Fraud Scheme Uncovered in China - July, 2017; and
• ‘Peer Reviewed’ Label Fraudulently Used on Scientific Literature - August, 2018.

 

[vegas giants]

Unfortunately, we are all very aware of the peer-review process.

• "But is it peer reviewed?" - Fraud and Science - October, 2012;
• Science Journal Pulls 60 Papers in Peer-Review Fraud - July, 2014;
• Peer review is broken – Springer announces 64 papers retracted due to fake reviews - August, 2015;
• Peer Review Fraud on the Rise at Scientific Journals - October, 2015;
• 107 cancer papers retracted due to peer review fraud - April, 2017;
• Peer-Review Fraud Scheme Uncovered in China - July, 2017; and
• ‘Peer Reviewed’ Label Fraudulently Used on Scientific Literature - August, 2018.

• 
  
  If peer review is broken.....dont drink your water

 

[longview]

Oh right.

The scientists are doing it for the money, but do it free.

And they anonymously approve each other’s work because academics is such a collegial enterprise.

You worked in a University, but you clearly weren’t faculty!

Not all or even most peer review is anonymous, and even if it were, if your friend has submitted a paper to Nature for example, don't you think they
mentioned that their paper was coming up for peer review?

 

[Threegoofs]

Not all or even most peer review is anonymous, and even if it were, if your friend has submitted a paper to Nature for example, don't you think they
mentioned that their paper was coming up for peer review?

Blinded peer review is basically the standard for most reputable journals.

But I agree, the crap you guys present from third rate journals like Energy and the Environment may not be blind. Or reviewed at all.

 

[longview]

Blinded peer review is basically the standard for most reputable journals.

But I agree, the crap you guys present from third rate journals like Energy and the Environment may not be blind. Or reviewed at all.

You think the small groups of AGW proponents in narrow areas of expertise, do not talk?
Climategate would suggest otherwise, if they have a paper submitted, everyone who is a likely reviewer knows they have just submitted a paper.

 

[Threegoofs]

You think the small groups of AGW proponents in narrow areas of expertise, do not talk?
Climategate would suggest otherwise, if they have a paper submitted, everyone who is a likely reviewer knows they have just submitted a paper.

Oh- so you’re saying that the academic rivals review each other’s papers, but don’t actually critique them.

Where do you get this insider knowledge?

Oh, right. Denier blogs.