Here are 'Joe Blow's' (the author of the graph) qualifications to comment on the subject.
Roy W. Spencer received his Ph.D. in meteorology at the University of Wisconsin-Madison in 1981. Before becoming a Principal Research Scientist at the University of Alabama in Huntsville in 2001, he was a Senior Scientist for Climate Studies at NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center, where he and Dr. John Christy received NASA’s Exceptional Scientific Achievement Medal for their global temperature monitoring work with satellites. Dr. Spencer’s work with NASA continues as the U.S. Science Team leader for the Advanced Microwave Scanning Radiometer flying on NASA’s Aqua satellite. He has provided congressional testimony several times on the subject of global warming.
Dr. Spencer’s research has been entirely supported by U.S. government agencies: NASA, NOAA, and DOE. He has never been asked by any oil company to perform any kind of service. Not even Exxon-Mobil.
About | Roy Spencer, PhD.
Vs the real world the climate models this whole panic is entirely based on are basically sh*t by whatever real world measure you choose to judge them by. Nuff said
Some people just like being scared and having some authority take them by the hand and lead them to what they want to be the true path of righteousness. Cossetted middle class Western lifestyles are too safe for them and they need a threat. Eco panics come and go and this current one has almost run its course. Hundreds of billions being squandered in the process
Perhaps you could start with avoiding the term "cons" when demanding people avoid the partisan crap. Goes to credibility. Take the time to type it out, or use a different reference. It's pretty well established what is attempting to be implied by the using the word.
But I didn't see anything partisan in that, just equality of criticism. "Lib" isn't exactly an endearing term.
I've been telling ya'll AGW is BS for what? 7+ YEARS. I've known this to be true since before the turn of the Century. Lot's of BS, wrapped around political grandstanding all with money flowing is not science. That's all the whole "GLOBAL WARMING" thing has been.
People worry about sea level rises? Go take a look around there world. There are port cities that are miles inland... now, and others that are submerged and lost to time. How ever did that happen if we are only just now destroying the earth with CO2?
how does posting the time of singular local records indicate anything about the trend in long term global averages?
and some people actually have studied math and science beyond middle school.
It's amazing you'd produce Joe Blow's creds from Joeblow.com. That bit of wanton brazen naivete aside, how do we know he hasn't gone bonkers since then?
And the bold part? CT dog-whistle, except it makes an ugly noise.
That's fine. However, if someone is demanding partisan responses aren't welcome, they probably shouldn't include a partisan pejorative in the request. I suggest that defeats the whole point.
Gore made a prediction that our Coastline would be submerged within 20 years and then he went and bought a Beechhouse
You would think that the People on the left would be sick of being wrong about everything.
And,But besides that, I don't understand why clean air, clean water and safe food is political. Regardless of politics, all of us need it. The one thing that the two parties should easily have consensus on, and yet profit even trumps that.that study is but one voice in a global sea of scientific studies that collaborate the seriousness of climate change.
What the hell does that mean?
That there's a far greater body of scientific work documenting climate change and it's ill effects to the environment. Thought it was clear enough.
That there's a far greater body of scientific work documenting climate change and it's ill effects to the environment. Thought it was clear enough.
But criticizing both is definitively not partisan. He referred to both liberals and conservatives with the slight, lib/con. And you picked up only on the con and accused him of partisanship, lol. I see which party you're partisan to.
Pray tell, do you believe there is a perfect "climate" for the Earth?That there's a far greater body of scientific work documenting climate change and it's ill effects to the environment. Thought it was clear enough.
Pray tell, do you believe there is a perfect "climate" for the Earth?
LOL.
What, so that changes the point?
Awesome.
I see which party you're partisan to.
How can you " document " something that doesn't exist, or only exist in computer models built on manipulated data ?
For the millionth time, manipulating temperate data to arrive at a pre-determined conclusion isn't Science, it's fraud.
NOAA quietly revises website after getting caught in global warming lie, admitting 1936 was hotter than 2012 - NaturalNews.com
You did say "collaborate" and i thought that was surprising coming from a true-believer since they'd never acknowledge they are collaborators.
But don't get me wrong, I know it also.
Not likely.
So, if there is no perfect climate, then it changes right?
Of course the climate changes, and would do so even if humans had never evolved, I suspect. But that's not the issue. The issue is whether or not the climate is changing for the worse due in any part to human activity. And there are plenty of scientific studies suggesting it does.
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?