- Joined
- Mar 11, 2009
- Messages
- 41,104
- Reaction score
- 12,202
- Location
- South Carolina
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
Mother nature.Personal anecdote, I've lived in the mountains for 30 years. And every year the "snow line" has gone up in elevation so that now, our valley no longer receives snow in the winter but receives rain.
For the last decade we have had snow in the valley only 2 years of that decade.
We used to get 10 foot snow drifts...have snow days for school, have the city shut down by snow.
Haven't had a snow day in...almost 20 years? At least 15 years.
Now what could cause the snow line to rise, except atmospheric temperature?
What caused this snow line to rise?
Let's see if you can actually comprehend this. The claim was rebuffed by somebody who didn't A) understand the process for gathering that data and B) lack of gridding. Now, your smoking gun evidence that global warming is not happening simply because corrections were made is about as laughable as saying gravity isn't real because Einstein's work corrected some of Newtons. As to why the NOAA updated its db, it's been explained ad nauseum to conspiracy theorists like yourself, so I'll simply post the explanation by something other than naturalnews:
In short, what you're really arguing is why isn't science as rigid as religion. It isn't because it's not based on dogma. :shrug:
View attachment 67176665
Temperatures have changed little in the past 15+ years.
Much ado over nothing.
If you'll look at your graph, you'll see that temperatures certainly HAVE changed in 15 years. An increase around 0.2 degrees at least.
That's pretty substantial, and given you are using two measures (satellite temps measuring the troposphere, not the surface) that are not considered to be as accurate or reflective of actual warming, it's even more concerning.
If you'll look at your graph, you'll see that temperatures certainly HAVE changed in 15 years. An increase around 0.2 degrees at least.
That's pretty substantial, and given you are using two measures (satellite temps measuring the troposphere, not the surface) that are not considered to be as accurate or reflective of actual warming, it's even more concerning.
No, the temperature has remained steady for 15 years. Reading the year scale along the bottom might clear up your misunderstanding.
Ever heard of a trend line ??
Why yes, I use them daily in my work.
And no trend line is shown.
But just eyeballing it you can see there is an increase.
Lol !!
Yes, " accurate " is the NOAA manipulating temperature data to arrive ar a predetermined conclusion.
Then obviously your "eyeballing" is not very good.
You do realize that satellite temperature measurement is done by microwave sensors on multiple NOAA satellites don't you???
If you can't discern where the trendline would be on this flat graph of temperature readings since 1998, then you don't have much understanding of graphs.
I think you're making a novice denier mistake... what they do dishonestly is to take the peak year of 1998 and count forward, pretending that cherry picking shows no increase. But you cant say 15+ years, silly! You have to use a specific number, currently 17. Because if you use a year before or after, its not correct.
So you honestly screwed up a dishonest myth, and for that we thank you.
Ok, there has been no increase for 17 years.
Happy now ??
Congratulations. You now are a fully educated denier who knows how to cherry pick data! Glad I can help.
I've been destroying climatistas on this board for over nine years now.
Your snarky comments aren't convincing.
I've been destroying climatistas on this board for over nine years now.
Your snarky comments aren't convincing.
Destroying?
Jesus. I had to explain your OWN ARGUMENT to you!
Now tell us how picking a single outlier year from datasets that dont correspond to actual surface temperature readings makes any sense at all.
Just a little something to foster debate on the forum :argue
Then we have yet one more reason, too many Americans don't believe the science
"See, I told you warmists - it's not getting any hotter, in fact temperatures have dropped slightly." say far too many clueless folks who for some reason think their personal experience is good for the whole world.
Son, you didn't explain anything to me.
A single outlier year ??? What the hell are you talking about ??
I'm providing proof that there has been no upward trend in global temps for the past 15 plus years ??
I don't think you understand what you are talking about and are a bit over your head here.
Maybe you should get a trend line and get back to us. Or better yet, a moving average- 5 year maybe?
Unless you don't know what a trend line is, since you apparently were confused on the last graph where you thought a trend line was graphed.
Just a little something to foster debate on the forum :argue
Then we have yet one more reason, too many Americans don't believe the science
"See, I told you warmists - it's not getting any hotter, in fact temperatures have dropped slightly." say far too many clueless folks who for some reason think their personal experience is good for the whole world.
It is interesting that, while 97% of the scientific community (AAAS,UCSUSA, etc) believes that climate change
(or global warming, take your pick) is the result of fossil fuels and human activity, people still cling to
the 3% as "proof" that it is not real.
This reminds me of Jor-El trying to warn about Krypton and everyone following the one scientist who insisted, "Krypton is just adjusting it's orbit." We all know how that turned out!
What We Know | What We KnowSorry, but the claim that 97% of the scientific community believes in man-made global warming has been thoroughly debunked.
Try again.
What We Know | What We Know
1. Climate scientists agree: climate change is happening here and now. Based on well-established evidence, about 97% of climate scientists have concluded that human-caused climate change is happening ...
Here's my link.
Where is yours?
In 2013, John Cook, an Australia-based blogger, and some of his friends reviewed abstracts of peer-reviewed papers published from 1991 to 2011. Mr. Cook reported that 97% of those who stated a position explicitly or implicitly suggest that human activity is responsible for some warming. His findings were published in Environmental Research Letters. Mr. Cook’s work was quickly debunked. In Science and Education in August 2013, for example, David R. Legates (a professor of geography at the University of Delaware and former director of its Center for Climatic Research) and three coauthors reviewed the same papers as did Mr. Cook and found “only 41 papers—0.3 percent of all 11,944 abstracts or 1.0 percent of the 4,014 expressing an opinion, and not 97.1 percent—had been found to endorse” the claim that human activity is causing most of the current warming. Elsewhere, climate scientists including Craig Idso, Nicola Scafetta, Nir J. Shaviv and Nils- Axel Morner, whose research questions the alleged consensus, protested that Mr. Cook ignored or misrepresented their work. Rigorous international surveys conducted by German scientists Dennis Bray and Hans von Storch —most recently published in Environmental Science & Policy in 2010—have found that most climate scientists disagree with the consensus on key issues such as the reliability of climate data and computer models.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?