Global Warming GOD Phil Jones admits: No global warming since 1995
1-20-2013
manmade gw/cc to be true!!!!
Each and every day the concept of manmade global warming/climate change
becomes more of a complete joke ;^D
Climategate U-turn as scientist at centre of row admits: There has been
no global warming since 1995
By Jonathan Petre
Data: Professor Phil Jones admitted his record keeping is 'not as good
as it should be'
The academic at the centre of the �Climategate� affair, whose raw data
is crucial to the theory of climate change, has admitted that he has
trouble �keeping track� of the information.
Colleagues say that the reason Professor Phil Jones has refused Freedom
of Information requests is that he may have actually lost the relevant
papers.
Professor Jones told the BBC yesterday there was truth in the
observations of colleagues that he lacked organisational skills, that
his office was swamped with piles of paper and that his record keeping
is �not as good as it should be�.
The data is crucial to the famous �hockey stick graph� used by climate
change advocates to support the theory.
Professor Jones also conceded the possibility that the world was warmer
in medieval times than now � suggesting global warming may not be a
man-made phenomenon.
And he said that for the past 15 years there has been no �statistically
significant� warming.
The admissions will be seized on by sceptics as fresh evidence that
there are serious flaws at the heart of the science of climate change
and the orthodoxy that recent rises in temperature are largely man-made.
Professor Jones has been in the spotlight since he stepped down as
director of the University of East Anglia�s Climatic Research Unit after
the leaking of emails that skeptics claim show scientists were
manipulating data.
The raw data, collected from hundreds of weather stations around the
world and analysed by his unit, has been used for years to bolster
efforts by the United Nation�s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
to press governments to cut carbon dioxide emissions.
Following the leak of the emails, Professor Jones has been accused of
�scientific fraud� for allegedly deliberately suppressing information
and refusing to share vital data with critics.
Discussing the interview, the BBC�s environmental analyst Roger Harrabin
said he had spoken to colleagues of Professor Jones who had told him
that his strengths included integrity and doggedness but not
record-keeping and office tidying.
Mr Harrabin, who conducted the interview for the BBC�s website, said the
professor had been collating tens of thousands of pieces of data from
around the world to produce a coherent record of temperature change.
That material has been used to produce the �hockey stick graph� which is
relatively flat for centuries before rising steeply in recent decades.
According to Mr Harrabin, colleagues of Professor Jones said �his office
is piled high with paper, fragments from over the years, tens of
thousands of pieces of paper, and they suspect what happened was he took
in the raw data to a central database and then let the pieces of paper
go because he never realised that 20 years later he would be held to
account over them�.
Asked by Mr Harrabin about these issues, Professor Jones admitted the
lack of organisation in the system had contributed to his reluctance to
share data with critics, which he regretted.
But he denied he had cheated over the data or unfairly influenced the
scientific process, and said he still believed recent temperature rises
were predominantly man-made.
Asked about whether he lost track of data, Professor Jones said: �There
is some truth in that. We do have a trail of where the weather stations
have come from but it�s probably not as good as it should be.
�There�s a continual updating of the dataset. Keeping track of
everything is difficult. Some countries will do lots of checking on
their data then issue improved data, so it can be very difficult. We
have improved but we have to improve more.�
He also agreed that there had been two periods which experienced similar
warming, from 1910 to 1940 and from 1975 to 1998, but said these could
be explained by natural phenomena whereas more recent warming could not.
He further admitted that in the last 15 years there had been no
�statistically significant� warming, although he argued this was a blip
rather than the long-term trend.
And he said that the debate over whether the world could have been even
warmer than now during the medieval period, when there is evidence of
high temperatures in northern countries, was far from settled.
Sceptics believe there is strong evidence that the world was warmer
between about 800 and 1300 AD than now because of evidence of high
temperatures in northern countries.
But climate change advocates have dismissed this as false or only
applying to the northern part of the world.
Professor Jones departed from this consensus when he said: �There is
much debate over whether the Medieval Warm Period was global in extent
or not. The MWP is most clearly expressed in parts of North America, the
North Atlantic and Europe and parts of Asia.
�For it to be global in extent, the MWP would need to be seen clearly in
more records from the tropical regions and the Southern hemisphere.
There are very few palaeoclimatic records for these latter two regions.
�Of course, if the MWP was shown to be global in extent and as warm or
warmer than today, then obviously the late 20th Century warmth would not
be unprecedented. On the other hand, if the MWP was global, but was less
warm than today, then the current warmth would be unprecedented.�
Sceptics said this was the first time a senior scientist working with
the IPCC had admitted to the possibility that the Medieval Warming
Period could have been global, and therefore the world could have been
hotter then than now.
Professor Jones criticised those who complained he had not shared his
data with them, saying they could always collate their own from publicly
available material in the US. And he said the climate had not cooled
�until recently � and then barely at all. The trend is a warming trend�.
Mr Harrabin told Radio 4�s Today programme that, despite the
controversies, there still appeared to be no fundamental flaws in the
majority scientific view that climate change was largely man-made.
But Dr Benny Pieser, director of the sceptical Global Warming Policy
Foundation, said Professor Jones�s �excuses� for his failure to share
data were hollow as he had shared it with colleagues and �mates�.
He said that until all the data was released, sceptics could not test it
to see if it supported the conclusions claimed by climate change advocates.
He added that the professor�s concessions over medieval warming were
�significant� because they were his first public admission that the
science was not settled.
_________________________________________________
Manmade global warming/climate change now has all the credibility that
the luck astrology mood ring had back in the '70's ;^D LOL!!!!!!
1-20-2013
> Yet *another* devastating blow to the tree-hugging liberals that SO want
> manmade gw/cc to be true!!!!
>
> Each and every day the concept of manmade global warming/climate change
> becomes more of a complete joke ;^D
>
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1250872/Climategate-U-turn-Astonishment-scientist-centre-global-warming-email-row-admits-data-organised.html
>
>
> Climategate U-turn as scientist at centre of row admits: There has been
> no global warming since 1995
>
So all the manmade global warming kooks...led by Professor Phil Jones
have known about no warming since 1995 yet they have been deliberately
LYING about warming to us ever since??????
And they *STILL* want us to take them seriously???????????
ROTGDMFFLMMFAO!!!!!!!!!!!!! ;^D
Bill Baker
wrote in message news:<sJ6dnSiKsJuoXOXW...@rcn.net>
So you bought the lie from the Daily Fail and you expect us to take you
seriously?
--
Hard drive dead?
Bring it back to life with SpinRite!
http://www.grc.com/sr/spinrite.htm
1-20-2013
So the Daily Mail faked the quote from Professor Phil Jones?
You manmade global warming/climate change kooks better get your stories
together.....as your entire scam is unraveling at an unprecedented and
accelerated pace now.
BTW - it's been hilarious the past few months watching you liberal
tree-huggers trying to hold onto your manmade gw/cc dream as the snow
and ice continue to pile up across the entire northern hemisphere in
what appears to be the beginning of a mini ice age ;^D
Bottom line: Professor Phil Jones admits no warming since 1995. Sorry
'bout that, tree-huggers ;^D LOL!!!!!
Bill Baker
wrote in message news:<9KydnUtPALKiXuXW...@rcn.net>
> Bill Baker wrote:
>> On Sunday February 14 2010 22:36, 1-20-2013 <0120...@obamas-lastday.com>
>> wrote in message news:<sJ6dnSiKsJuoXOXW...@rcn.net>
>>
>>> 1-20-2013 wrote:
>>>> Yet *another* devastating blow to the tree-hugging liberals that SO
>>>> want manmade gw/cc to be true!!!!
>>>>
>>>> Each and every day the concept of manmade global warming/climate change
>>>> becomes more of a complete joke ;^D
>>>>
>>>> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1250872/Climategate-U-turn-
>> Astonishment-scientist-centre-global-warming-email-row-admits-data-
>> organised.html
>>>>
>>>> Climategate U-turn as scientist at centre of row admits: There has been
>>>> no global warming since 1995
>>>>
>>> So all the manmade global warming kooks...led by Professor Phil Jones
>>> have known about no warming since 1995 yet they have been deliberately
>>> LYING about warming to us ever since??????
>>>
>>> And they *STILL* want us to take them seriously???????????
>>>
>>> ROTGDMFFLMMFAO!!!!!!!!!!!!! ;^D
>>
>> So you bought the lie from the Daily Fail and you expect us to take you
>> seriously?
>>
>
> So the Daily Mail faked the quote from Professor Phil Jones?
No, they lied about what he actually said.
> You manmade global warming/climate change kooks better get your stories
> together.....as your entire scam is unraveling at an unprecedented and
> accelerated pace now.
Gee, more hard evidence for global warming every day and the denial kooks
think they're winning?
> BTW - it's been hilarious the past few months watching you liberal
> tree-huggers trying to hold onto your manmade gw/cc dream as the snow
> and ice continue to pile up across the entire northern hemisphere in
> what appears to be the beginning of a mini ice age ;^D
But you know what? It's 90 degrees in Australia! In the middle of
February! If that doesn't prove global warming to you, you must be insane!
> Bottom line: Professor Phil Jones admits no warming since 1995. Sorry
> 'bout that, tree-huggers ;^D LOL!!!!!
Still insisting on repeating the lie, are you?
1-20-2013
ROTGDMFFLMMFAO!!!!! ;^D
Seriously?!??!!!?! You're going *there* ????? LOL!!!! ;^D
>
>> You manmade global warming/climate change kooks better get your stories
>> together.....as your entire scam is unraveling at an unprecedented and
>> accelerated pace now.
>
> Gee, more hard evidence for global warming every day and the denial kooks
> think they're winning?
Evidence or cooked data? The shennanigans exposed by ClimateGate now
requires anything you tree-huggers claim to be evidence to be taken with
several grains of salt.
>
>> BTW - it's been hilarious the past few months watching you liberal
>> tree-huggers trying to hold onto your manmade gw/cc dream as the snow
>> and ice continue to pile up across the entire northern hemisphere in
>> what appears to be the beginning of a mini ice age ;^D
>
> But you know what? It's 90 degrees in Australia! In the middle of
> February! If that doesn't prove global warming to you, you must be insane!
>
90 degrees in the Australian summer???? Sounds a bit cool actually ;^D
>> Bottom line: Professor Phil Jones admits no warming since 1995. Sorry
>> 'bout that, tree-huggers ;^D LOL!!!!!
>
> Still insisting on repeating the lie, are you?
Just going with the quote that was printed.
When you can point me to a credible link where Prof. Phil Jones denies
this claim.....let me know. In the meantime, the majority of the world
will continue to laugh at you liberal, tree-hugging, manmade global
warming/climate change kooks ;^D
David Hartung
What did he actually say? Please provide a cite.
>> You manmade global warming/climate change kooks better get your stories
>> together.....as your entire scam is unraveling at an unprecedented and
>> accelerated pace now.
>
> Gee, more hard evidence for global warming every day and the denial kooks
> think they're winning?
Please give examples of this hard evidence.
>> BTW - it's been hilarious the past few months watching you liberal
>> tree-huggers trying to hold onto your manmade gw/cc dream as the snow
>> and ice continue to pile up across the entire northern hemisphere in
>> what appears to be the beginning of a mini ice age ;^D
>
> But you know what? It's 90 degrees in Australia! In the middle of
> February! If that doesn't prove global warming to you, you must be insane!
Given that it is Summer in Australiam that actually sounds reasonable.
>> Bottom line: Professor Phil Jones admits no warming since 1995. Sorry
>> 'bout that, tree-huggers ;^D LOL!!!!!
>
> Still insisting on repeating the lie, are you?
Again, please tell us what he actually said, and provide a cite.
Bill Baker
wrote in message news:<Xe-dnTgOfuBZWuXW...@rcn.net>
Yes, because it's true.
>>> You manmade global warming/climate change kooks better get your stories
>>> together.....as your entire scam is unraveling at an unprecedented and
>>> accelerated pace now.
>>
>> Gee, more hard evidence for global warming every day and the denial kooks
>> think they're winning?
>
> Evidence or cooked data? The shennanigans exposed by ClimateGate now
> requires anything you tree-huggers claim to be evidence to be taken with
> several grains of salt.
Climategate? Seriously?!??!!!?! You're going *there* ?????
>>> BTW - it's been hilarious the past few months watching you liberal
>>> tree-huggers trying to hold onto your manmade gw/cc dream as the snow
>>> and ice continue to pile up across the entire northern hemisphere in
>>> what appears to be the beginning of a mini ice age ;^D
>>
>> But you know what? It's 90 degrees in Australia! In the middle of
>> February! If that doesn't prove global warming to you, you must be
>> insane!
>>
>
> 90 degrees in the Australian summer???? Sounds a bit cool actually ;^D
Yeah, it's Australian summer, thanks to global warming!
>>> Bottom line: Professor Phil Jones admits no warming since 1995. Sorry
>>> 'bout that, tree-huggers ;^D LOL!!!!!
>>
>> Still insisting on repeating the lie, are you?
>
> Just going with the quote that was printed.
No, you're going to with the lie about the quote that was printed.
> When you can point me to a credible link where Prof. Phil Jones denies
> this claim.....let me know. In the meantime, the majority of the world
> will continue to laugh at you liberal, tree-hugging, manmade global
> warming/climate change kooks ;^D
It's in the very same link you posted. If you actually read the quote and
not what the Daily Fail said about it, it becomes obvious that he said the
exact opposite of what they said he said.
Bill Baker
wrote in message news:<avmdnQt9H5BRWuXW...@giganews.com>
You can read it in the link above.
>>> You manmade global warming/climate change kooks better get your stories
>>> together.....as your entire scam is unraveling at an unprecedented and
>>> accelerated pace now.
>>
>> Gee, more hard evidence for global warming every day and the denial kooks
>> think they're winning?
>
> Please give examples of this hard evidence.
http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1962294,00.html
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/35443
http://www.extremeicesurvey.org/index.php/new_gallery/
>>> BTW - it's been hilarious the past few months watching you liberal
>>> tree-huggers trying to hold onto your manmade gw/cc dream as the snow
>>> and ice continue to pile up across the entire northern hemisphere in
>>> what appears to be the beginning of a mini ice age ;^D
>>
>> But you know what? It's 90 degrees in Australia! In the middle of
>> February! If that doesn't prove global warming to you, you must be
>> insane!
>
> Given that it is Summer in Australiam that actually sounds reasonable.
Yes, summer thanks to global warming!
>>> Bottom line: Professor Phil Jones admits no warming since 1995. Sorry
>>> 'bout that, tree-huggers ;^D LOL!!!!!
>>
>> Still insisting on repeating the lie, are you?
>
> Again, please tell us what he actually said, and provide a cite.
Again, read what he actually said in the article, not the lie the Daily Fail
made up about it.
1-20-2013
Yep. As has the majority of the citizens of the world....hence the
failure at Copenhagen by the manmade gw/cc kooks to gain any traction on
their liberal agenda.
The concept of manmade global warming/climate change was always
laughable. ClimateGate turned manmade gw/cc into the equivalent of the
classic "knock knock" joke ;^D
>
>>>> BTW - it's been hilarious the past few months watching you liberal
>>>> tree-huggers trying to hold onto your manmade gw/cc dream as the snow
>>>> and ice continue to pile up across the entire northern hemisphere in
>>>> what appears to be the beginning of a mini ice age ;^D
>>> But you know what? It's 90 degrees in Australia! In the middle of
>>> February! If that doesn't prove global warming to you, you must be
>>> insane!
>>>
>> 90 degrees in the Australian summer???? Sounds a bit cool actually ;^D
>
> Yeah, it's Australian summer, thanks to global warming!
Hmmmmm....and all these years we've been told that it's the angle of the
earth with regards to the sun that determines summer in the northern
hemisphere....versus summer in the southern hemisphere.
Are you *seriously* trying to claim that summers in Australia never
reached temps of 90 degrees until "manmade" global warming/climate
change started happening???????? No, are you *SERIOUSLY* claiming
this????? :^D LOL!!!!
>
>>>> Bottom line: Professor Phil Jones admits no warming since 1995. Sorry
>>>> 'bout that, tree-huggers ;^D LOL!!!!!
>>> Still insisting on repeating the lie, are you?
>> Just going with the quote that was printed.
>
> No, you're going to with the lie about the quote that was printed.
Ok.
>
>> When you can point me to a credible link where Prof. Phil Jones denies
>> this claim.....let me know. In the meantime, the majority of the world
>> will continue to laugh at you liberal, tree-hugging, manmade global
>> warming/climate change kooks ;^D
>
> It's in the very same link you posted. If you actually read the quote and
> not what the Daily Fail said about it, it becomes obvious that he said the
> exact opposite of what they said he said.
Prof Phil Jones said: "He further admitted that in the last 15 years
there had been no �statistically significant� warming, although he
argued this was a blip rather than the long-term trend."
So now Prof Phil Jones can tell us about what will happen in the
future....after we get through this "blip"??????????????
ROTGDMFFLMMFAO!!!!!!!!! ;^D
Killing, Inc.
> On Sunday February 14 2010 23:04, 1-20-2013 <01202...@obamas-lastday.com>> >> On Sunday February 14 2010 22:45, 1-20-2013 <01202...@obamas-lastday.com>
> >> wrote in message <news:9KydnUtPALKiXuXW...@rcn.net>
>
> >>> Bill Baker wrote:
> >>>> On Sunday February 14 2010 22:36, 1-20-2013
LOL! Yes, Aussies in the southern hemisphere have had their summers
opposite the northern winter for maybe a billion years, but now all of
the sudden global warming is causing it.
See, this is why the left-wing is lucky to have the dumb masses on
their side, because there's power in numbers no matter how dumb they
are. Intellectually though, the left is a dumbed-down version of the
flat earth society, and their dogmatic religious faith in gullible
warming proves it.
Democrats and other douchebaggers are still the dumbest creatures on
the planet.
1-20-2013
Yep. Apparently this liberal, tree-hugging, manmade gw/cc kook believes
that if we all start driving Prius's and we all "go
green"......Australia won't have to endure 90 degree heat in the middle
of it's Australian summer ;^D
And then they wonder why they're laughed at!
Bill Baker
wrote in message news:<ds-dnYlQmvUtUOXW...@rcn.net>
Yes, and we all know that if a majority of people believe something then it
must be true. That's why we know that for thousands of years the Earth was
flat and demons caused diseases.
> The concept of manmade global warming/climate change was always
> laughable. ClimateGate turned manmade gw/cc into the equivalent of the
> classic "knock knock" joke ;^D
Only to those who started from the position that global warming must be fake
and latch on to any "evidence" they can find no matter how tenuous.
>>>>> BTW - it's been hilarious the past few months watching you liberal
>>>>> tree-huggers trying to hold onto your manmade gw/cc dream as the snow
>>>>> and ice continue to pile up across the entire northern hemisphere in
>>>>> what appears to be the beginning of a mini ice age ;^D
>>>> But you know what? It's 90 degrees in Australia! In the middle of
>>>> February! If that doesn't prove global warming to you, you must be
>>>> insane!
>>>>
>>> 90 degrees in the Australian summer???? Sounds a bit cool actually ;^D
>>
>> Yeah, it's Australian summer, thanks to global warming!
>
> Hmmmmm....and all these years we've been told that it's the angle of the
> earth with regards to the sun that determines summer in the northern
> hemisphere....versus summer in the southern hemisphere.
Well, now you know.
> Are you *seriously* trying to claim that summers in Australia never
> reached temps of 90 degrees until "manmade" global warming/climate
> change started happening???????? No, are you *SERIOUSLY* claiming
> this????? :^D LOL!!!!
Well if a snowstorm in DC disproves global warming, then a hot February in
Australia proves it.
>>>>> Bottom line: Professor Phil Jones admits no warming since 1995. Sorry
>>>>> 'bout that, tree-huggers ;^D LOL!!!!!
>>>> Still insisting on repeating the lie, are you?
>>> Just going with the quote that was printed.
>>
>> No, you're going to with the lie about the quote that was printed.
>
> Ok.
>
>>
>>> When you can point me to a credible link where Prof. Phil Jones denies
>>> this claim.....let me know. In the meantime, the majority of the world
>>> will continue to laugh at you liberal, tree-hugging, manmade global
>>> warming/climate change kooks ;^D
>>
>> It's in the very same link you posted. If you actually read the quote
>> and not what the Daily Fail said about it, it becomes obvious that he
>> said the exact opposite of what they said he said.
>
> Prof Phil Jones said: "He
He who? Who was Professor Jones saying said this? Or was this the Daily
Fail trying to summarize what they thought Jones said, in which case your
punctuation is all wrong and have thus been caught in a lie?
> further admitted that in the last 15 years
> there had been no 'statistically significant' warming, although he
> argued this was a blip rather than the long-term trend."
>
> So now Prof Phil Jones can tell us about what will happen in the
> future....after we get through this "blip"??????????????
>
> ROTGDMFFLMMFAO!!!!!!!!! ;^D
Perhaps you should read the actual interview at
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8511670.stm# because the word
"blip" appears nowhere in there.
Bill Baker
wrote in message news:<51904069-d12d-4ca2-ae4f-
a7e8e9...@15g2000yqa.googlegroups.com>
Well if a snowstorm in DC disproves global warming, then a hot February in
Australia proves it.
--
David Hartung
I read the article, and saw nothing to indicate that the Daily Mail was
lying.
>>>> You manmade global warming/climate change kooks better get your stories
>>>> together.....as your entire scam is unraveling at an unprecedented and
>>>> accelerated pace now.
>>> Gee, more hard evidence for global warming every day and the denial kooks
>>> think they're winning?
>> Please give examples of this hard evidence.
>
> http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1962294,00.html
> http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/35443
> http://www.extremeicesurvey.org/index.php/new_gallery/
Not a lot of "hard" evidence here.
>>>> BTW - it's been hilarious the past few months watching you liberal
>>>> tree-huggers trying to hold onto your manmade gw/cc dream as the snow
>>>> and ice continue to pile up across the entire northern hemisphere in
>>>> what appears to be the beginning of a mini ice age ;^D
>>> But you know what? It's 90 degrees in Australia! In the middle of
>>> February! If that doesn't prove global warming to you, you must be
>>> insane!
>> Given that it is Summer in Australiam that actually sounds reasonable.
>
> Yes, summer thanks to global warming!
Do you believe that summer in Australia is supposed to happen at the
same time as summer in the USA?
Bill Baker
wrote in message news:<wO2dnYy2KehOSeXW...@giganews.com>
Then you might want to try reading the actual interview at
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8511670.stm#
>>>>> You manmade global warming/climate change kooks better get your
>>>>> stories together.....as your entire scam is unraveling at an
>>>>> unprecedented and accelerated pace now.
>>>> Gee, more hard evidence for global warming every day and the denial
>>>> kooks think they're winning?
>>> Please give examples of this hard evidence.
>>
>> http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1962294,00.html
>> http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/35443
>> http://www.extremeicesurvey.org/index.php/new_gallery/
>
> Not a lot of "hard" evidence here.
Only because you don't want to see it.
>>>>> BTW - it's been hilarious the past few months watching you liberal
>>>>> tree-huggers trying to hold onto your manmade gw/cc dream as the snow
>>>>> and ice continue to pile up across the entire northern hemisphere in
>>>>> what appears to be the beginning of a mini ice age ;^D
>>>> But you know what? It's 90 degrees in Australia! In the middle of
>>>> February! If that doesn't prove global warming to you, you must be
>>>> insane!
>>> Given that it is Summer in Australiam that actually sounds reasonable.
>>
>> Yes, summer thanks to global warming!
>
> Do you believe that summer in Australia is supposed to happen at the
> same time as summer in the USA?
Do you believe that a snowstorm in one part of the USA disproves global
warming?
1-20-2013
Regardless of what people believe, ClimateGate made a whole bunch of
people become skeptical as to what the actual agenda of the liberal
manmade gw/cc movement is.
>
>> The concept of manmade global warming/climate change was always
>> laughable. ClimateGate turned manmade gw/cc into the equivalent of the
>> classic "knock knock" joke ;^D
>
> Only to those who started from the position that global warming must be fake
> and latch on to any "evidence" they can find no matter how tenuous.
Global warming and climate change are occurring now, always have
occurred, and always will occur. Man can do absolutely nothing about it.
>
>>>>>> BTW - it's been hilarious the past few months watching you liberal
>>>>>> tree-huggers trying to hold onto your manmade gw/cc dream as the snow
>>>>>> and ice continue to pile up across the entire northern hemisphere in
>>>>>> what appears to be the beginning of a mini ice age ;^D
>>>>> But you know what? It's 90 degrees in Australia! In the middle of
>>>>> February! If that doesn't prove global warming to you, you must be
>>>>> insane!
>>>>>
>>>> 90 degrees in the Australian summer???? Sounds a bit cool actually ;^D
>>> Yeah, it's Australian summer, thanks to global warming!
>> Hmmmmm....and all these years we've been told that it's the angle of the
>> earth with regards to the sun that determines summer in the northern
>> hemisphere....versus summer in the southern hemisphere.
>
> Well, now you know.
;^D
>
>> Are you *seriously* trying to claim that summers in Australia never
>> reached temps of 90 degrees until "manmade" global warming/climate
>> change started happening???????? No, are you *SERIOUSLY* claiming
>> this????? :^D LOL!!!!
>
> Well if a snowstorm in DC disproves global warming, then a hot February in
> Australia proves it.
Nah, winter and snow in the northern hemisphere and summer and heat in
the southern hemisphere during February simply shows that the climate
and the weather has remained remarkably stable throughout the ages.
>
>>>>>> Bottom line: Professor Phil Jones admits no warming since 1995. Sorry
>>>>>> 'bout that, tree-huggers ;^D LOL!!!!!
>>>>> Still insisting on repeating the lie, are you?
>>>> Just going with the quote that was printed.
>>> No, you're going to with the lie about the quote that was printed.
>> Ok.
>>
>>>> When you can point me to a credible link where Prof. Phil Jones denies
>>>> this claim.....let me know. In the meantime, the majority of the world
>>>> will continue to laugh at you liberal, tree-hugging, manmade global
>>>> warming/climate change kooks ;^D
>>> It's in the very same link you posted. If you actually read the quote
>>> and not what the Daily Fail said about it, it becomes obvious that he
>>> said the exact opposite of what they said he said.
>> Prof Phil Jones said: "He
>
> He who?
He=Professor Phil Jones.
> Who was Professor Jones saying said this?
The interviewer said Phil Jones said this.
> Or was this the Daily
> Fail trying to summarize what they thought Jones said, in which case your
> punctuation is all wrong and have thus been caught in a lie?
Just discussing the quotes of Phil Jones that will be in every newspaper
worldwide tomorrow.
>
>> further admitted that in the last 15 years
>> there had been no 'statistically significant' warming, although he
>> argued this was a blip rather than the long-term trend."
>>
>> So now Prof Phil Jones can tell us about what will happen in the
>> future....after we get through this "blip"??????????????
>>
>> ROTGDMFFLMMFAO!!!!!!!!! ;^D
>
> Perhaps you should read the actual interview at
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8511670.stm# because the word
> "blip" appears nowhere in there.
He certainly implied a "blip". Regardless, tonight Professor Phil Jones
resembles the Wizard in the Wizard of Oz after Toto pulled the curtain
open ;^D
LOL!!!!
Neoconis_Ignoramus
> Yet *another* devastating blow to the tree-hugging liberals that SO want
> manmade gw/cc to be true!!!!
>
> Each and every day the concept of manmade global warming/climate change
> becomes more of a complete joke ;^D
>
>
> Climategate U-turn as scientist at centre of row admits: There has been
> no global warming since 1995
>
> By Jonathan Petre
>
> Data: Professor Phil Jones admitted his record keeping is 'not as good
> as it should be'
>
> is crucial to the theory of climate change, has admitted that he has
>
> Colleagues say that the reason Professor Phil Jones has refused Freedom
> of Information requests is that he may have actually lost the relevant
> papers.
>
> Professor Jones told the BBC yesterday there was truth in the
> observations of colleagues that he lacked organisational skills, that
> his office was swamped with piles of paper and that his record keeping
>
> The data is crucial to the famous hockey stick graph used by climate
> change advocates to support the theory.
>
> Professor Jones also conceded the possibility that the world was warmer
> man-made phenomenon.
>
> And he said that for the past 15 years there has been no statistically
> significant warming.
>
> The admissions will be seized on by sceptics as fresh evidence that
> there are serious flaws at the heart of the science of climate change
> and the orthodoxy that recent rises in temperature are largely man-made.
>
> Professor Jones has been in the spotlight since he stepped down as
> the leaking of emails that skeptics claim show scientists were
> manipulating data.
>
> The raw data, collected from hundreds of weather stations around the
> world and analysed by his unit, has been used for years to bolster
> to press governments to cut carbon dioxide emissions.
>
> Following the leak of the emails, Professor Jones has been accused of
> and refusing to share vital data with critics.
>
> said he had spoken to colleagues of Professor Jones who had told him
> that his strengths included integrity and doggedness but not
> record-keeping and office tidying.
>
> professor had been collating tens of thousands of pieces of data from
> around the world to produce a coherent record of temperature change.
>
> relatively flat for centuries before rising steeply in recent decades.
>
> is piled high with paper, fragments from over the years, tens of
> thousands of pieces of paper, and they suspect what happened was he took
> in the raw data to a central database and then let the pieces of paper
> go because he never realised that 20 years later he would be held to
>
> Asked by Mr Harrabin about these issues, Professor Jones admitted the
> lack of organisation in the system had contributed to his reluctance to
> share data with critics, which he regretted.
>
> But he denied he had cheated over the data or unfairly influenced the
> scientific process, and said he still believed recent temperature rises
> were predominantly man-made.
>
> is some truth in that. We do have a trail of where the weather stations
>
> There s a continual updating of the dataset. Keeping track of
> everything is difficult. Some countries will do lots of checking on
> their data then issue improved data, so it can be very difficult. We
> have improved but we have to improve more.
>
> warming, from 1910 to 1940 and from 1975 to 1998, but said these could
> be explained by natural phenomena whereas more recent warming could not.
>
> He further admitted that in the last 15 years there had been no
> rather than the long-term trend.
>
> And he said that the debate over whether the world could have been even
> warmer than now during the medieval period, when there is evidence of
> high temperatures in northern countries, was far from settled.
>
> Sceptics believe there is strong evidence that the world was warmer
> between about 800 and 1300 AD than now because of evidence of high
> temperatures in northern countries.
>
> But climate change advocates have dismissed this as false or only
> applying to the northern part of the world.
>
> much debate over whether the Medieval Warm Period was global in extent
> or not. The MWP is most clearly expressed in parts of North America, the
> North Atlantic and Europe and parts of Asia.
>
> more records from the tropical regions and the Southern hemisphere.
> There are very few palaeoclimatic records for these latter two regions.
>
> warmer than today, then obviously the late 20th Century warmth would not
> be unprecedented. On the other hand, if the MWP was global, but was less
> warm than today, then the current warmth would be unprecedented.
>
> the IPCC had admitted to the possibility that the Medieval Warming
> Period could have been global, and therefore the world could have been
> hotter then than now.
>
> Professor Jones criticised those who complained he had not shared his
> data with them, saying they could always collate their own from publicly
> available material in the US. And he said the climate had not cooled
>
> Mr Harrabin told Radio 4 s Today programme that, despite the
> controversies, there still appeared to be no fundamental flaws in the
> majority scientific view that climate change was largely man-made.
>
> But Dr Benny Pieser, director of the sceptical Global Warming Policy
> data were hollow as he had shared it with colleagues and mates .
>
> He said that until all the data was released, sceptics could not test it
> to see if it supported the conclusions claimed by climate change advocates.
>
> significant because they were his first public admission that the
> science was not settled.
> _________________________________________________
> Manmade global warming/climate change now has all the credibility that
> the luck astrology mood ring had back in the '70's ;^D LOL!!!!!!
I know you're retarded, so I'll try to make this as simple as
possible.
Jones "further admitted that in the last 15 years there had been no
statistically significant warming, although he argued this was a blip
rather than the long-term trend. "
Apparently, you're too fucking stupid to understand statistics. Here
we go...
Scientists uses probabilistic methods (statistics) to gauge the
strength of their hypotheses, if they have enough data to do so. The
scientific standard for "statistical significance", which what Jones
was referring to here, is a 95% or above statistically-derived level
of confidence in the hypothesis. That means, ya stupid drivelling
little moron, that while something may not meet the criteria that an
actual scientist uses, it may still have high probability of being
true.
Now, that being established, here is Jones' actual response to the
actual question:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8511670.stm
B - Do you agree that from 1995 to the present there has been no
statistically-significant global warming?
Yes, but only just. I also calculated the trend for the period 1995 to
2009. This trend (0.12C per decade) is positive, but not significant
at the 95% significance level. The positive trend is quite close to
the significance level. Achieving statistical significance in
scientific terms is much more likely for longer periods, and much less
likely for shorter periods.
Now note, half-witted dope, he said "only just" and "quite close to
the significance level". A rational, sane, not stupid person
(meaning, not you) can easily infer that the probability is something
like 85-90%, if not higher, but something less than 95%. That means,
subliterate kook, there is a very high likelihood of the hypothesis of
a warming trend from 1995 to 2009 being accurate, which of course is
far different from the moronic assertion that the Mail put over on
dimwitted readers such as yourself.
I'm sure this won't change your unfounded, ill-informed opinion, but
it is kind of enjoyable to expose you for the fuckin fool you are.
1-20-2013
You can always tell when the liberal is going into "usenet rage" mode
when they start with the profanities and vulgar language ;^D
Yet here we have another liberal, tree-hugging, manmade global warming
kook that is simply devastated that his manmade GW/CC dream is now being
exposed as a complete and utter fraud.
Hope this helps!!!!! ;^D
Neoconis_Ignoramus
>
> - Show quoted text -
Complete and utter inability to respond in any way whatsoever to
(more) facts noted, dipshit. Probably just went right over your head,
just like all sciency-like things do, and you quit upon encountering
the first 3 syllable word.
LMFAO - such a goddamned moron.
Bill Baker
wrote in message news:<7emdnV56spe9ROXW...@rcn.net>
But that still doesn't prove that global warming is not real.
>>> The concept of manmade global warming/climate change was always
>>> laughable. ClimateGate turned manmade gw/cc into the equivalent of the
>>> classic "knock knock" joke ;^D
>>
>> Only to those who started from the position that global warming must be
>> fake and latch on to any "evidence" they can find no matter how tenuous.
>
> Global warming and climate change are occurring now, always have
> occurred, and always will occur. Man can do absolutely nothing about it.
It's occurring more rapidly than it ever has in the past. There is more
carbon dioxide in the air than there ever has been in the past.
>>>>>>> BTW - it's been hilarious the past few months watching you liberal
>>>>>>> tree-huggers trying to hold onto your manmade gw/cc dream as the
>>>>>>> snow and ice continue to pile up across the entire northern
>>>>>>> hemisphere in what appears to be the beginning of a mini ice age ;^D
>>>>>> But you know what? It's 90 degrees in Australia! In the middle of
>>>>>> February! If that doesn't prove global warming to you, you must be
>>>>>> insane!
>>>>>>
>>>>> 90 degrees in the Australian summer???? Sounds a bit cool actually ;^D
>>>> Yeah, it's Australian summer, thanks to global warming!
>>> Hmmmmm....and all these years we've been told that it's the angle of the
>>> earth with regards to the sun that determines summer in the northern
>>> hemisphere....versus summer in the southern hemisphere.
>>
>> Well, now you know.
>
> ;^D
>
>>
>>> Are you *seriously* trying to claim that summers in Australia never
>>> reached temps of 90 degrees until "manmade" global warming/climate
>>> change started happening???????? No, are you *SERIOUSLY* claiming
>>> this????? :^D LOL!!!!
>>
>> Well if a snowstorm in DC disproves global warming, then a hot February
>> in Australia proves it.
>
> Nah, winter and snow in the northern hemisphere and summer and heat in
> the southern hemisphere during February simply shows that the climate
> and the weather has remained remarkably stable throughout the ages.
Actually, scientists have found that the temperature of the globe is rising
more than it ever has in the past. This can lead to climate destabilization
and cause things like massive snowstorms.
>>>>>>> Bottom line: Professor Phil Jones admits no warming since 1995.
>>>>>>> Sorry
>>>>>>> 'bout that, tree-huggers ;^D LOL!!!!!
>>>>>> Still insisting on repeating the lie, are you?
>>>>> Just going with the quote that was printed.
>>>> No, you're going to with the lie about the quote that was printed.
>>> Ok.
>>>
>>>>> When you can point me to a credible link where Prof. Phil Jones denies
>>>>> this claim.....let me know. In the meantime, the majority of the world
>>>>> will continue to laugh at you liberal, tree-hugging, manmade global
>>>>> warming/climate change kooks ;^D
>>>> It's in the very same link you posted. If you actually read the quote
>>>> and not what the Daily Fail said about it, it becomes obvious that he
>>>> said the exact opposite of what they said he said.
>>> Prof Phil Jones said: "He
>>
>> He who?
>
> He=Professor Phil Jones.
Why would Professor Phil Jones use "He" when talking about himself?
>> Who was Professor Jones saying said this?
>
> The interviewer said Phil Jones said this.
Who at the Daily Fail did the interview? Or do you mean the article writer
who never spoke to Jones and thus you have been caught in yet another lie?
>> Or was this the Daily
>> Fail trying to summarize what they thought Jones said, in which case your
>> punctuation is all wrong and have thus been caught in a lie?
>
> Just discussing the quotes of Phil Jones that will be in every newspaper
> worldwide tomorrow.
The Daily Fail lied about what Phil Jones said. If every newspaper wants to
print that lie, then they will certainly be living down to my already low
expectations of the mainstream media.
>>> further admitted that in the last 15 years
>>> there had been no 'statistically significant' warming, although he
>>> argued this was a blip rather than the long-term trend."
>>>
>>> So now Prof Phil Jones can tell us about what will happen in the
>>> future....after we get through this "blip"??????????????
>>>
>>> ROTGDMFFLMMFAO!!!!!!!!! ;^D
>>
>> Perhaps you should read the actual interview at
>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8511670.stm# because the word
>> "blip" appears nowhere in there.
>
> He certainly implied a "blip". Regardless, tonight Professor Phil Jones
> resembles the Wizard in the Wizard of Oz after Toto pulled the curtain
> open ;^D
>
> LOL!!!!
I know you really, really wish this were true because you concluded that
global warming was a hoax even before this interview, but unlike in Alice in
Wonderland, just saying something is so doesn't make it so. If you had read
the actual interview, you would have seen that Jones does not refute or
disprove anything about global warming.
David Hartung
> Do you believe that a snowstorm in one part of the USA disproves global
> warming?
No, rather I believe that our knowledge of how the Earth's climate works
is no where near the point where we can make the sort of predictions
which have been coming out of the left.
1-20-2013
Awww, come-on, Cheer up little guy. You're fellow liberal tree-huggers
will surely manufacture another "crisis" that you can latch onto.....now
that manmade global warming/climate change is laughed at universally ;^D
Neoconis_Ignoramus
>
> - Show quoted text -
Translated: Science is too hard for my stupid ass. Therefore I'll
just believe that AGW is all a giant hoax.
The con "mind" at work.
Are you this stupid every day, or is today a special day?
Bill Baker
wrote in message news:<ML2dnRqTkM4nfOXW...@giganews.com>
What's this imaginary "the left" that has been making predictions? As far
as I've seen, it's been scientists who have made predictions. Although I
will admit that reality has a well-known liberal bias.
lab~rat >:-)
<wba...@postini.spamcon.org> puked:
>But you know what? It's 90 degrees in Australia! In the middle of
>February! If that doesn't prove global warming to you, you must be insane!
You're joking, right? I can't tell sarcasm from written words that
well...
--
lab~rat >:-)
Do you want polite or do you want sincere?
lab~rat >:-)
<wba...@postini.spamcon.org> puked:
>On Monday February 15 2010 00:00, David Hartung <d_ha...@hotmail.com>
There's snow on the ground in every state in the country but Hawaii.
lab~rat >:-)
<bella...@verizon.net> puked:
>On Feb 14, 9:55ÔøΩpm, 1-20-2013 <01202...@obamas-lastday.com> wrote:
>> Neoconis_Ignoramus wrote:
>> > On Feb 14, 9:40 pm, 1-20-2013 <01202...@obamas-lastday.com> wrote:
>> >> Neoconis_Ignoramus wrote:
>> >>> I know you're retarded, so I'll try to make this as simple as
>> >>> possible.
>> >> You can always tell when the liberal is going into "usenet rage" mode
>> >> when they start with the profanities and vulgar language ;^D
>>
>> >> Yet here we have another liberal, tree-hugging, manmade global warming
>> >> kook that is simply devastated that his manmade GW/CC dream is now being
>> >> exposed as a complete and utter fraud.
>>
>> >> Hope this helps!!!!! ;^D- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> >> - Show quoted text -
>>
>> > Complete and utter inability to respond in any way whatsoever to
>> > (more) facts noted, dipshit. ÔøΩProbably just went right over your head,
>> > just like all sciency-like things do, and you quit upon encountering
>> > the first 3 syllable word.
>>
>> > LMFAO - such a goddamned moron.
>>
>> Awww, come-on, Cheer up little guy. You're fellow liberal tree-huggers
>> will surely manufacture another "crisis" that you can latch onto.....now
>> that manmade global warming/climate change is laughed at universally ;^D- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
>Translated: Science is too hard for my stupid ass. Therefore I'll
>just believe that AGW is all a giant hoax.
>
>The con "mind" at work.
>
>Are you this stupid every day, or is today a special day?
So is the science that there has been no appreciable temperature rise
for 15 years proof of global warming or what?
Bill Baker
message news:<u2rin59bt88226vb6...@4ax.com>
So what?
Bill Baker
message news:<50rin5tjqn58k9iv7...@4ax.com>
> On Sun, 14 Feb 2010 22:49:15 -0500, Bill Baker
> <wba...@postini.spamcon.org> puked:
>
>>But you know what? It's 90 degrees in Australia! In the middle of
>>February! If that doesn't prove global warming to you, you must be
>>insane!
>
> You're joking, right? I can't tell sarcasm from written words that
> well...
Yes, that was sarcasm.
Bill Baker
message news:<45rin5tqoeon7mffa...@4ax.com>
> On Sun, 14 Feb 2010 22:04:38 -0800 (PST), Neoconis_Ignoramus
> <bella...@verizon.net> puked:
>
>>On Feb 14, 9:55 pm, 1-20-2013 <01202...@obamas-lastday.com> wrote:
>>> Neoconis_Ignoramus wrote:
>>> > On Feb 14, 9:40 pm, 1-20-2013 <01202...@obamas-lastday.com> wrote:
>>> >> Neoconis_Ignoramus wrote:
>>> >>> I know you're retarded, so I'll try to make this as simple as
>>> >>> possible.
>>> >> You can always tell when the liberal is going into "usenet rage" mode
>>> >> when they start with the profanities and vulgar language ;^D
>>>
>>> >> Yet here we have another liberal, tree-hugging, manmade global
>>> >> warming kook that is simply devastated that his manmade GW/CC dream
>>> >> is now being exposed as a complete and utter fraud.
>>>
>>> >> Hope this helps!!!!! ;^D- Hide quoted text -
>>>
>>> >> - Show quoted text -
>>>
>>> > Complete and utter inability to respond in any way whatsoever to
>>> > (more) facts noted, dipshit. Probably just went right over your head,
>>> > just like all sciency-like things do, and you quit upon encountering
>>> > the first 3 syllable word.
>>>
>>> > LMFAO - such a goddamned moron.
>>>
>>> Awww, come-on, Cheer up little guy. You're fellow liberal tree-huggers
>>> will surely manufacture another "crisis" that you can latch onto.....now
>>> that manmade global warming/climate change is laughed at universally
>>> ;^D- Hide quoted text -
>>>
>>> - Show quoted text -
>>
>>Translated: Science is too hard for my stupid ass. Therefore I'll
>>just believe that AGW is all a giant hoax.
>>
>>The con "mind" at work.
>>
>>Are you this stupid every day, or is today a special day?
>
> So is the science that there has been no appreciable temperature rise
> for 15 years proof of global warming or what?
That's not what Jones said. You can read the actual interview at
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8511670.stm# to see what he said,
not just what the Daily Fail claims he said.
1-20-2013
Here's what the fraud Phil Jones said:
Interviewer - Do you agree that from 1995 to the present there has been
no statistically-significant global warming?"
Jones - "Yes, but only just."
So he agrees that there has been no warming for the past 15 years, but
we're very close to almost having warming during that timeframe ;^D
LOL!!!!!
David Hartung
Yes, he said that there has been no scientifically significant rise in
global temperatures for the past 15 years. This is not hard to understand.
Sid9
"Bill Baker" <wba...@postini.spamcon.org> wrote in message
news:-JSdncAme_My4uTW...@earthlink.com...
> On Monday February 15 2010 10:45, lab~rat >:-) <ch...@cheeze.net> wrote
> in
> message news:<50rin5tjqn58k9iv7...@4ax.com>
>
>> On Sun, 14 Feb 2010 22:49:15 -0500, Bill Baker
>> <wba...@postini.spamcon.org> puked:
>>
>>>But you know what? It's 90 degrees in Australia! In the middle of
>>>February! If that doesn't prove global warming to you, you must be
>>>insane!
>>
>> You're joking, right? I can't tell sarcasm from written words that
>> well...
>
> Yes, that was sarcasm.
>
.
.
.
This isn't sarcasm, it's real:
Brazil heat wave kills 32 elderly people
By MARCO SIBAJA (AP) - 4 days ago
BRASILIA, Brazil - Thirty-two elderly people died in a southeastern
Brazilian city this week because of a heat wave that has pushed temperatures
to unseasonably high levels, a health official said Wednesday.
All of the fatalities in the coastal city of Santos near Sao Paulo involved
people between 60 and 90 years old with pre-existing conditions such as
diabetes or hypertension, according to the health ministry in Santos.
The first deaths were registered Monday, when the temperature in Santos
reached 39 degrees Celsius (102 Fahrenheit). Temperatures were well above 30
degrees (86 F) in the following days.
Luiz Fernando Gomes da Silva, Santos' health ministry's coordinator for the
elderly, is urging people to drink a lot of liquids amid the heat of the
South American summer.
Temperatures are also hitting record levels in Rio de Janeiro, where the
city's five-day Carnival bash begins Friday.
The heat wave follows more than a month of torrential rains across
southeastern Brazil that killed more than 70 people - most victims of
mudslides that swept away ramshackle homes built on hillsides.
Tater Gumfries
> It's 90 degrees in Australia! In the middle of
> February! If that doesn't prove global warming to you, you must be insane!
;?)
Tater
znuybv
> "Bill Baker" <wba...@postini.spamcon.org> wrote in message
>
> news:-JSdncAme_My4uTW...@earthlink.com...
>
>
>
> > On Monday February 15 2010 10:45, lab~rat >:-) <ch...@cheeze.net> wrote
> > in
> > message <news:50rin5tjqn58k9iv7...@4ax.com>
>
> >> On Sun, 14 Feb 2010 22:49:15 -0500, Bill Baker
> >> <wba...@postini.spamcon.org> puked:
>
> >>>But you know what? It's 90 degrees in Australia! In the middle of
> >>>February! If that doesn't prove global warming to you, you must be
> >>>insane!
>
> >> You're joking, right? I can't tell sarcasm from written words that
> >> well...
>
> > Yes, that was sarcasm.
>
> .
> .
> .
> This isn't sarcasm, it's real:
>
> Brazil heat wave kills 32 elderly people
>
> By MARCO SIBAJA (AP) - 4 days ago
>
> BRASILIA, Brazil - Thirty-two elderly people died in a southeastern
> Brazilian city this week because of a heat wave that has pushed temperatures
> to unseasonably high levels, a health official said Wednesday.
>
You fell for the hoax and now you are going to spend the rest of your
life in denial. It's sad.
Tater Gumfries
> Neoconis_Ignoramus wrote:
> > I know you're retarded, so I'll try to make this as simple as
> > possible.
>
> You can always tell when the liberal is going into "usenet rage" mode
> when they start with the profanities and vulgar language ;^D
He tried to educate you about the meaning os "statistical
significance".
You should have paid attention.
Tater
Tater Gumfries
> Bill Baker wrote:
> > On Monday February 15 2010 10:48, lab~rat >:-) <ch...@cheeze.net> wrote in
> > message <news:45rin5tqoeon7mffa...@4ax.com>
>
> >> On Sun, 14 Feb 2010 22:04:38 -0800 (PST), Neoconis_Ignoramus
> > not just what the Daily Fail claims he said.
>
> Here's what the fraud Phil Jones said:
>
> Interviewer - Do you agree that from 1995 to the present there has been
> no statistically-significant global warming?"
>
> Jones - "Yes, but only just."
>
> So he agrees that there has been no warming for the past 15 years,
No, not at all. Once again, you fail to understand what "statistical
significance" means.
Seriously, you should learn some science before you comment on a
subject requiring it.
Tater
Tater Gumfries
> Bill Baker wrote:
> > On Monday February 15 2010 10:48, lab~rat >:-) <ch...@cheeze.net> wrote in
> > message <news:45rin5tqoeon7mffa...@4ax.com>
>
> >> On Sun, 14 Feb 2010 22:04:38 -0800 (PST), Neoconis_Ignoramus
> > not just what the Daily Fail claims he said.
>
> Yes, he said that there has been no scientifically significant rise in
> global temperatures for the past 15 years. This is not hard to understand.
So you agree with Bill. Good, because he is correct.
Tater
1-20-2013
>
> "Bill Baker" <wba...@postini.spamcon.org> wrote in message
> news:-JSdncAme_My4uTW...@earthlink.com...
>> On Monday February 15 2010 10:45, lab~rat >:-) <ch...@cheeze.net>
>> wrote in
>> message news:<50rin5tjqn58k9iv7...@4ax.com>
>>
>>> On Sun, 14 Feb 2010 22:49:15 -0500, Bill Baker
>>> <wba...@postini.spamcon.org> puked:
>>>
>>>> But you know what? It's 90 degrees in Australia! In the middle of
>>>> February! If that doesn't prove global warming to you, you must be
>>>> insane!
>>>
>>> You're joking, right? I can't tell sarcasm from written words that
>>> well...
>>
>> Yes, that was sarcasm.
>>
>
> .
> .
> .
> This isn't sarcasm, it's real:
>
> Brazil heat wave kills 32 elderly people
>
> By MARCO SIBAJA (AP) - 4 days ago
>
> BRASILIA, Brazil - Thirty-two elderly people died in a southeastern
> Brazilian city this week because of a heat wave that has pushed
> temperatures to unseasonably high levels, a health official said Wednesday.
Meanwhile record cold leads to death in Miami, Florida:
http://www.nbcmiami.com/news/local-beat/Miamis-First-Cold-Weather-Death-Confirmed-81248747.html
Miami's First Cold Weather Death Confirmed
Cold temps and no heat led to hypothermia for an elderly man
By TODD WRIGHT
A 77-year-old man died of hypothermia Tuesday in what could be
considered the first death in Miami that could be attributed to the
record cold weather that has lingered in the city.
Wilfredo Arreyes died at Jackson Memorial Hospital and his roommate
Miguel Alemon, 93, is still in critical condition after the two spent
days in the frigid cold weather with no heat or covers in their
apartment on Northwest 10th Avenue and Northwest 2nd Street in Little
Havana.
The Miami-Dade Medical Examiner's Office will do an autopsy to determine
if something else may have contributed to the Arreyes' death.
Police and fire rescue officials found the two men inside their
apartment huddled together on Friday night. Arreyes was already
unconscious and Alemon was semi-conscious, officials said. There was no
heat in the apartment and there did not appear to be any covers for the
men to get warm.
It's So Cold That....
It's So Cold That....
LOOK
It's So Cold That....
Temperatures have dipped into the 30s several times over the past two
weeks and freeze warnings have been in effect for Miami and other parts
of South Florida for a few days now.
Police were notified of the plight of the men by a third roommate, who
was out of town and became concerned after he couldn't get his phone
calls answered.
znuybv
> Bill Baker wrote:
> > On Monday February 15 2010 10:48, lab~rat >:-) <ch...@cheeze.net> wrote in
> > message <news:45rin5tqoeon7mffa...@4ax.com>
>
> >> On Sun, 14 Feb 2010 22:04:38 -0800 (PST), Neoconis_Ignoramus
> > not just what the Daily Fail claims he said.
>
> Here's what the fraud Phil Jones said:
>
> Interviewer - Do you agree that from 1995 to the present there has been
> no statistically-significant global warming?"
>
> Jones - "Yes, but only just."
>
> So he agrees that there has been no warming for the past 15 years, but
> we're very close to almost having warming during that timeframe ;^D
>
> LOL!!!!!
Does almost having global warming justify wrecking the world economy?
lab~rat >:-)
<wba...@postini.spamcon.org> puked:
So the snow storm is in more than "one part" of the USA.
1-20-2013
Face it son, the jigs up ;^D
>
> Seriously, you should learn some science before you comment on a
> subject requiring it.
Sounds good.
Then again I could always use the "Professor" Phil Jones method and
throw whatever I want against the wall and see what sticks. And then
when you call me on it.....I can also use the ol' "I lost the evidence"
trick ;^D LOL!!!!!
>
> Tater
lab~rat >:-)
<wba...@postini.spamcon.org> puked:
>On Monday February 15 2010 10:45, lab~rat >:-) <ch...@cheeze.net> wrote in
>message news:<50rin5tjqn58k9iv7...@4ax.com>
>
>> On Sun, 14 Feb 2010 22:49:15 -0500, Bill Baker
>> <wba...@postini.spamcon.org> puked:
>>
>>>But you know what? It's 90 degrees in Australia! In the middle of
>>>February! If that doesn't prove global warming to you, you must be
>>>insane!
>>
>> You're joking, right? I can't tell sarcasm from written words that
>> well...
>
>Yes, that was sarcasm.
Good. I didn't think that you were that big of an idiot, but this is
the internet so ya never know... ;)
lab~rat >:-)
<wba...@postini.spamcon.org> puked:
>On Monday February 15 2010 10:48, lab~rat >:-) <ch...@cheeze.net> wrote in
Yeah, it's even more damning:
A - Do you agree that according to the global temperature record used
by the IPCC, the rates of global warming from 1860-1880, 1910-1940 and
1975-1998 were identical?
An initial point to make is that in the responses to these questions
I've assumed that when you talk about the global temperature record,
you mean the record that combines the estimates from land regions with
those from the marine regions of the world. CRU produces the land
component, with the Met Office Hadley Centre producing the marine
component.
Temperature data for the period 1860-1880 are more uncertain, because
of sparser coverage, than for later periods in the 20th Century. The
1860-1880 period is also only 21 years in length. As for the two
periods 1910-40 and 1975-1998 the warming rates are not statistically
significantly different (see numbers below).
I have also included the trend over the period 1975 to 2009, which has
a very similar trend to the period 1975-1998.
>So, in answer to the question, the warming rates for all 4 periods are
>similar and not statistically significantly different from each other.
>Here are the trends and significances for each period:
>Period Length Trend
>(Degrees C per decade) Significance
1860-1880 21 0.163 Yes
1910-1940 31 0.15 Yes
1975-1998 24 0.166 Yes
1975-2009 35 0.161 Yes
B - Do you agree that from 1995 to the present there has been no
statistically-significant global warming
>Yes, but only just. I also calculated the trend for the period 1995 to 2009.
This trend (0.12C per decade) is positive, but not significant at the
95% significance level. The positive trend is quite close to the
significance level. Achieving statistical significance in scientific
terms is much more likely for longer periods, and much less likely for
shorter periods.
C - Do you agree that from January 2002 to the present there has been
statistically significant global cooling?
No. This period is even shorter than 1995-2009. The trend this time is
>negative (-0.12C per decade), but this trend is not statistically
significant.
znuybv
Climategate U-turn as scientist at centre of row admits: There has
been no global warming since 1995
Major Debacle
>
> Here's what the fraud Phil Jones said:
>
> Interviewer - Do you agree that from 1995 to the present there has been
> no statistically-significant global warming?"
>
> Jones - "Yes, but only just."
>
> So he agrees that there has been no warming for the past 15 years, but
> we're very close to almost having warming during that timeframe ;^D
>
> LOL!!!!!
Let's see... when was the Kyoto Protocol adopted?
Oh, yeah... 1997
hmm...
Bill Baker
message news:<5u4jn5dcqmrcgte8q...@4ax.com>
"Snow on the ground in every state" does not mean that there's a snowstorm
in every state.
Bill Baker
wrote in message news:<57idnb9HS9qgDuTW...@rcn.net>
More record-setting weather, more proof of global warming.
Bill Baker
wrote in message news:<pr2dnVI0z4eTF-TW...@rcn.net>
Now you're lying about what Jones said. Look up the phrase "statistically
significant" and get back to me when you actually understand what it means.
Bill Baker
wrote in message news:<pKGdnWoQLYr5EOTW...@giganews.com>
Obviously it is hard to understand, since you utterly failed to understand
it.
Bill Baker
message news:<d35jn5hn5bthr75a7...@4ax.com>
Only to someone who is completely retarded.
Bill Baker
message news:<4e6e50d5-d8f4-43ec-
bdc3-6b9...@x1g2000prb.googlegroups.com>
More lies from the Daily Fail.
1-20-2013
;^D *THIS*, despite "Professor" Phil Jones admitting that there has
been no warming since 1995, even though we got close to almost having
some warming?????? LOL!!!!!!!!!!
Bill Baker
wrote in message news:<X4OdnZSTmeBdB-TW...@rcn.net>
He admitted no such thing. You are a liar.
> even though we got close to almost having some warming??????
> LOL!!!!!!!!!!
We did have warming. You're lying again.
1-20-2013
Cool! So then manmade global warming is cured!!!!!!!
No need for Obama's Cap and Tax bill because Kyoto occurred in 1997 and
there has been no warming since!!!!!
ROTGDMFFLMMFAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ;^D
1-20-2013
;^D Kinda like BJ Clintons definition of what *is* is. LOL.
Oooops, looks like I've been feeding a troll here. Silly me ;^D ROTFL!!!!
znuybv
> On Monday February 15 2010 13:46, znuybv <tjwil...@yahoo.com> wrote in
> message news:<4e6e50d5-d8f4-43ec-
> bdc3-6b9557aaa...@x1g2000prb.googlegroups.com>
>
>
>
> > On Feb 15, 10:30 am, Tater Gumfries <ta...@kernsholler.net> wrote:
> >> On Feb 14, 10:40 pm, 1-20-2013 <01202...@obamas-lastday.com> wrote:
>
> >> > Neoconis_Ignoramus wrote:
> >> > > I know you're retarded, so I'll try to make this as simple as
> >> > > possible.
>
> >> > You can always tell when the liberal is going into "usenet rage" mode
> >> > when they start with the profanities and vulgar language ;^D
>
> >> He tried to educate you about the meaning os "statistical
> >> significance".
>
> >> You should have paid attention.
>
> >> Tater
>
> > Climategate U-turn as scientist at centre of row admits: There has
> > been no global warming since 1995
> >http://snipurl.com/udioz
>
> More lies from the Daily Fail.
>
> --
incorrectly reporting what he said?
1-20-2013
Ignore that man behind the curtain!!! ;^D
>
>> even though we got close to almost having some warming??????
>> LOL!!!!!!!!!!
>
> We did have warming. You're lying again.
>
I wish it would warm up here. Man, it's *COLD* outside!!!!
Only 3 more days till spring training opens in Ft. Myers, FL!!!! Always
a *sure* sign of spring!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
lab~rat >:-)
<wba...@postini.spamcon.org> puked:
Ok, you got me there. Seeing I never lived where there was snow, my
terminology is off.
Is it safe to say that this doesn't happen all too often?
lab~rat >:-)
lab~rat >:-)
<wba...@postini.spamcon.org> puked:
Do you live in perpetual opposite day? The data and what he said
shows the warming was statistically nil. Not to mention, he opened
the door to the idea that we had warming equal or greater than present
prior to the industrial revolution.
I guess those boiling cauldrons of oil they were pouring over the
castle walls was the cause of that "global warming"...
David Hartung
To say that there has been no statistically significant warming, is to
say that there has not been enough warming to make a difference. For
practical purposes, there has been no warming.
GaryDeWaay
d_ha...@hotmail.com David Hartung says...
Except that is the exact opposite of what he actually said... the
smaller the sample size, the lesser the chance of "significance"... the
larger the sample size, the larger the chance of "significance."
If you think this disproves GW, you couldn't be more clueless to
science.
Hint: It should be the OTHER WAY AROUND!
--
Have you heard about Toyota's new model the Palin?
The engine grinds non stop, gives off a lot of gas, quits mid-trip, and
is prone to hard right turns. I smell another recall.
-anonymous blog poster
lab~rat >:-)
<d_ha...@hotmail.com> puked:
Yet they foolishly keep posting that link like it's a rebuttal to that
statement.
"It's a lie, you don't know science. That's not what he said".
Then they post what he said and it *is* what he said.
Dumbasses.
David Hartung
I have never said that there is no "global warming". What have said is
that we do not have enough information to draw the conclusions that are
being published in the media.
GaryDeWaay
d_ha...@hotmail.com David Hartung says...
Well except above "For practical purposes, there has been no warming."
What have said is
> that we do not have enough information to draw the conclusions that are
> being published in the media.
>
Most of the peer-reviewed data disagrees with you.
Quite honestly, with the mild summer and horrendous winter the last few
seasons, I'm not so sure myself.
But thats kinda silly. Weather and climate are two different things.
Oh, and BTW, I am a person where I BENEFIT from some global warming...
so I don't have any bone to pick here.
If GW is happening, my pocket book increases, if it isn't, the planet is
not being destroyed... thats a win/win if there ever is one.
neoconis_ignoramus
> >>> not just what the Daily Fail claims he said.
> >> Here's what the fraud Phil Jones said:
>
> >> Interviewer - Do you agree that from 1995 to the present there has been
> >> no statistically-significant global warming?"
>
> >> Jones - "Yes, but only just."
>
> >> So he agrees that there has been no warming for the past 15 years,
>
> > No, not at all. Once again, you fail to understand what "statistical
> > significance" means.
>
> > Seriously, you should learn some science before you comment on a
> > subject requiring it.
>
> To say that there has been no statistically significant warming, is to
> say that there has not been enough warming to make a difference. For
>
> - Show quoted text -
Gee, I wonder at what point during a scientist's education they're
taught the distinction between statistical significance and "not
enough to make a difference". Oh wait, they aren't, and you're a
blithering fool for asserting as much.
Note also that Jones said "there is a positive trend". I know it's
hard for you undereducated illiterate cons to understand these
concepts, judging by your incoherent responses. But you'd have at
least thought the lizard brain sect wouldve been able to deduce that
"there is a positive trend" does NOT equal "there has been no
warming". Once again, I apparently vastly overestimated the cognitive
capabilities of the con mind, or lack thereof.
Jones applied a 95% confidence interval to measure statistical
significance. Based on what Jones said (that the resultant score of
the data was close to .95) I assume that he couldve run the test at
85% or 90% and it would have been "statistically significant". Let's
say for example he used an 85% confidence level as his threshold. At
that rate, it's pretty clear to all except the most diluted brain that
the data would show a statistically significant trend towards warming,
with a greater than 85% probability that the trend was accurate.
Think about it, dipshit cons - there is at least an 85% chance that
the hypothesis that there was warming between 1995 and 2009. 85%.
Put in terms you little nitwits may understand, 85% is the
probabilility of the following things being individually true:
a. Your high-school level of education has led you to an
ignorant, worthless, uselss existence where you specialize in being
angry at anything not in your miserable little boat.
b. Your parents beat you as children
c. You actually think Sarah Palin is smart
d. You actually think tax cuts on the wealthy will somehow
make you prosperous.
1-20-2013
The rest of the liberal elitist's silliness is snipped.....for sanity's
sake ;^D
They should but a box at the bottom of everybody's 2010 tax return forms
giving you the option to send all of your tax refund or any other amount
you wish to some manmade global warming fund. *THEN* we'd truly see how
much these liberal elitists care about their cause as the majority of
them leave that little box unchecked ;^D
In the meantime, I suggest that everytime one of these liberal elitists
tells us more "facts" about manmade global warming....we respond to
their post with a global warming joke.
I'll start:
"According to a new U.N. report, the global warming outlook is much
worse than originally predicted. Which is pretty bad when they
originally predicted it would destroy the planet." --Jay Leno
ROTGDFLMMFAO!!!!!!! ;^D
Tom Sr.
> It's So Cold That....
> It's So Cold That....
> LOOK
> It's So Cold That....
> Temperatures have dipped into the 30s several times over the past two
> weeks and freeze warnings have been in effect for Miami and other parts
> of South Florida for a few days now.
----------
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=123671588
*Get This: Warming Planet Can Mean More Snow*
by Christopher Joyce
February 15, 2010
With snow blanketing much of the country, the topic of global warming
has become the butt of jokes.
Climate skeptics built an igloo in Washington, D.C., during the recent
storm and dedicated it to former Vice President Al Gore, who's become
the public face of climate change. There was also a YouTube video
called "12 inches of global warming" that showed snow plows driving
through a blizzard.
For scientists who study the climate, it's all a bit much. They're
trying to dig out.
Most don't see a contradiction between a warming world and lots of
snow. That includes Kevin Trenberth, a prominent climate scientist at
the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Colorado.
"The fact that the oceans are warmer now than they were, say, 30 years
ago means there's about on average 4 percent more water vapor lurking
around over the oceans than there was, say, in the 1970s," he says.
Warmer water means more water vapor rises up into the air, and what
goes up must come down.
"So one of the consequences of a warming ocean near a coastline like
the East Coast and Washington, D.C., for instance, is that you can get
dumped on with more snow partly as a consequence of global warming,"
he says.
And Trenberth notes that you don't need very cold temperatures to get
big snow. In fact, when the mercury drops too low, it may be too cold
to snow.
There's something else fiddling with the weather this year — a strong
El Nino. That's the weather pattern that, every few years, raises
itself up out of the western Pacific Ocean and blows east to the
Americas. It brings heavy rains and storms to California and the south
and southeast. It also pushes high-altitude jet streams farther south,
which bring colder air with them.
Trenberth also says El Nino can "lock in" weather patterns like a
meteorological highway, so that storms keep coming down the same
track.
True, those storms have been record breakers. But meteorologist Jeff
Masters, with the Web site Weather Underground, says it's average
temperatures — not snowfall — that really measure climate change.
"Because if it's cold enough to snow, you will get snow," Masters
says. "We still have winter even if temperatures have warmed on
average, oh, about 1 degree Fahrenheit over the past 100 years."
Masters say that 1 degree average warming is not enough to eliminate
winter. Or storms.
A storm is part of what scientists classify as weather. Weather is
largely influenced by local conditions and changes week to week. It's
fickle — fraught with wild ups and downs.
Climate is the long-term trend of atmospheric conditions across large
regions, even the whole planet. Changes in climate are slow and
measured in decades, not weeks.
Masters and most climate scientists say a warming climate would be
expected to affect the weather, sometimes drastically, but exactly
where and when is hard to predict.
"In that kind of a climate, you will have more frequent extreme
events, heat waves and so on, but again, none of those individual
events is proof itself that climate is changing," Masters says.
Climate scientists say they can't prove any single weather event is
due to climate change. Thus, they say, Hurricane Katrina or the heat
wave in Vancouver that's dogging the Winter Olympics isn't proof that
climate change is happening. Nor can southern and eastern snowstorms
prove that it's not.
----------
1-20-2013
> On Feb 15, 1:32 pm, 1-20-2013 <01202...@obamas-lastday.com> wrote:
>> It's So Cold That....
>> It's So Cold That....
>> LOOK
>> It's So Cold That....
>> Temperatures have dipped into the 30s several times over the past two
>> weeks and freeze warnings have been in effect for Miami and other parts
>> of South Florida for a few days now.
>
> ----------
> http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=123671588
>
> *Get This: Warming Planet Can Mean More Snow*
Of *course* it can ;^D LOL!!!!
That's the "beauty" of the manmade global warming/climate change
silliness.....you liberal tree-huggers will claim any and everything is
happening due to manmade global warming/climate change.
Only problem is, the jig is up. The entire manmade global
warming/climate change movement has been exposed as nothing but a
massive, money grabbing HOAX!!! It's the end of the liberal
tree-huggers wet dream scenario.
We are now in the process of showing our disgust for you liberal
tree-huggers and removing you and your representatives from office in
the great democratic purge that began in Massachusetts on January 19
(congratulations to US Senator Scott Brown R-Massachusetts) and will
gain in momentum in the November 2010 and 2012 elections!!!!
BTW - here's a global warming joke for you liberal elitists:
"Experts say this global warming is serious, and they are predicting now
that by the year 2050, we will be out of party ice." --David Letterman
ROTGDMFFLMMFAO!!!!!!!!!!!!! ;^D
zzpat
Did you read the interview? I bet not. If you had, you'd have picked
up this goody and you wouldn't look like a complete ass.
"E - How confident are you that warming has taken place and that
humans are mainly responsible?
I'm 100% confident that the climate has warmed. As to the second
question, I would go along with IPCC Chapter 9 - there's evidence that
most of the warming since the 1950s is due to human activity. "
1-20-2013
I'm 100% confident that "Professor" Phil Jones is a liberal,
tree-hugging kook just like all of the remaining folks that still
believe in the manmade global warming/climate change fairytale.
How can you take a "Professor" that loses the evidence that he claims
"proves" that manmade global warming is real seriously???????????
Here's another global warming joke for ya:
"Al Gore has a hit movie called 'An Inconvenient Truth.' I have an
inconvenient truth for him: you're still not the president." ;^D
ROTFLMMFAO!!!!!!!!!!
Tater Gumfries
> On Feb 15, 10:30 am, Tater Gumfries <ta...@kernsholler.net> wrote:
>
>
> > > Neoconis_Ignoramus wrote:
> > > > I know you're retarded, so I'll try to make this as simple as
> > > > possible.
>
> > > You can always tell when the liberal is going into "usenet rage" mode
> > > when they start with the profanities and vulgar language ;^D
>
> > significance".
>
> > You should have paid attention.
>
> > Tater
>
You still don't understand "statistical significance".
That should be EXTREMELY embarrassing for someone arguing about a
sscientific matter.
Tater
Bill Baker
message news:<cl8jn5p26l1us5ott...@4ax.com>
Probably. But it also doesn't disprove global warming.
Bill Baker
wrote in message news:<X4OdnZGTmeDkAeTW...@rcn.net>
Hey, dipshit, the man whose word you are taking as gospel truth never said
that there is no global warming.
>>> even though we got close to almost having some warming??????
>>> LOL!!!!!!!!!!
>>
>> We did have warming. You're lying again.
>>
>
> I wish it would warm up here. Man, it's *COLD* outside!!!!
Global warming does not mean that the winter season is canceled, dumbfuck.
In fact, it does mean that we are likely to see more extreme weather like
the unprecedented snowstorms here in the Midwest.
Bill Baker
message news:<rp8jn5p50ohe1mim0...@4ax.com>
Quick quiz for you:
True or false: heat causes water to evaporate.
Clouds are caused by:
A. Giant cotton balls flown into the air by NASA
B. God's Q-tips
C. Evaporated water
Precipitation like rain and snow are caused by:
A. Angels crying
B. UFOs
C. The above mentioned clouds formed by evaporated water
True or false: The more heat, the more water evaporates and thus the more
precipitation that occurs.
Bill Baker
wrote in message news:<67CdnQ6HFZruc-TW...@rcn.net>
Of course you are, because you made up your mind even before the Daily Fail
lied about the interview that global warming was some librul plot to
separate you from your money.
Bill Baker
wrote in message news:<_KednQziRuWvSOTW...@rcn.net>
The presence of hypocrites in no way undermines the actual evidence of
global warming.
> In the meantime, I suggest that everytime one of these liberal elitists
> tells us more "facts" about manmade global warming....we respond to
> their post with a global warming joke.
Hey, make all the jokes you want. I'm all for a good laugh. I usually
laugh at your posts anyway, so you may as well make it a twofer!
Bill Baker
wrote in message news:<X4OdnZaTmeA7BuTW...@rcn.net>
Ah yes, when you've been proven wrong just change the subject and call the
other person a troll. It is the science deniers' way, after all.
Bill Baker
wrote in message news:<X4OdnZeTmeCxBuTW...@rcn.net>
> Major Debacle wrote:
>> 1-20-2013 wrote:
>>
>>> Here's what the fraud Phil Jones said:
>>>
>>> Interviewer - Do you agree that from 1995 to the present there has been
>>> no statistically-significant global warming?"
>>>
>>> Jones - "Yes, but only just."
>>>
>>> So he agrees that there has been no warming for the past 15 years, but
>>> we're very close to almost having warming during that timeframe ;^D
>>>
>>> LOL!!!!!
>>
>> Let's see... when was the Kyoto Protocol adopted?
>>
>> Oh, yeah... 1997
>>
>> hmm...
>
> Cool! So then manmade global warming is cured!!!!!!!
>
> No need for Obama's Cap and Tax bill because Kyoto occurred in 1997 and
> there has been no warming since!!!!!
>
> ROTGDMFFLMMFAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ;^D
"E - How confident are you that warming has taken place and that
humans are mainly responsible?
I'm 100% confident that the climate has warmed. As to the second
question, I would go along with IPCC Chapter 9 - there's evidence that
most of the warming since the 1950s is due to human activity. "
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8511670.stm
--
Bill Baker
message news:<bs8jn5lpcveem8vjt...@4ax.com>
No, he said it was statistically insignificant over a 15 year period. That
doesn't mean there was no warming at all.
> Not to mention, he opened
> the door to the idea that we had warming equal or greater than present
> prior to the industrial revolution.
Prove it.
> I guess those boiling cauldrons of oil they were pouring over the
> castle walls was the cause of that "global warming"...
No.
Bill Baker
message news:<7afeed89-fbf4-4776-a6ef-
e359ce...@k36g2000prb.googlegroups.com>
> On Feb 15, 10:59 am, Bill Baker <wba...@postini.spamcon.org> wrote:
>> On Monday February 15 2010 13:46, znuybv <tjwil...@yahoo.com> wrote in
>> message news:<4e6e50d5-d8f4-43ec-
>> bdc3-6b9557aaa...@x1g2000prb.googlegroups.com>
>>
>>
>>
>> > On Feb 15, 10:30 am, Tater Gumfries <ta...@kernsholler.net> wrote:
>> >> On Feb 14, 10:40 pm, 1-20-2013 <01202...@obamas-lastday.com> wrote:
>>
>> >> > Neoconis_Ignoramus wrote:
>> >> > > I know you're retarded, so I'll try to make this as simple as
>> >> > > possible.
>>
>> >> > You can always tell when the liberal is going into "usenet rage"
>> >> > mode when they start with the profanities and vulgar language ;^D
>>
>> >> He tried to educate you about the meaning os "statistical
>> >> significance".
>>
>> >> You should have paid attention.
>>
>> >> Tater
>>
>> > Climategate U-turn as scientist at centre of row admits: There has
>> > been no global warming since 1995
>> >http://snipurl.com/udioz
>>
>> More lies from the Daily Fail.
>>
>> --
> They are reporting what Jones said. Is it Jones who's lying or
> incorrectly reporting what he said?
They are lying about what Jones said.
lab~rat >:-)
<wba...@postini.spamcon.org> puked:
That was never my contention.
lab~rat >:-)
<wba...@postini.spamcon.org> puked:
>> I wish it would warm up here. Man, it's *COLD* outside!!!!
>
>Global warming does not mean that the winter season is canceled, dumbfuck.
>In fact, it does mean that we are likely to see more extreme weather like
>the unprecedented snowstorms here in the Midwest.
I love that one. It's just like something out of 1984. You guys are
so precious...
lab~rat >:-)
<wba...@postini.spamcon.org> puked:
Precipitation in globally warm regions turns out to be rain.
lab~rat >:-)
<bella...@verizon.net> puked:
>Note also that Jones said "there is a positive trend".
I've noticed a positive trend in stories about shoddy record keeping,
inaccurate data and selective inclusion of same. Are we supposed to
ignore that and blindly follow what we are being told by
government-paid shills?
lab~rat >:-)
<wba...@postini.spamcon.org> puked:
>On Monday February 15 2010 14:06, 1-20-2013 <0120...@obamas-lastday.com>
They should have asked him how interested he was about studying the
possibility of warming during Medieval times. I would suggest that he
has no interest in that whatsoever as the government has no interest
in funding that type of research because it would hinder their money
making scheme.
lab~rat >:-)
<wba...@postini.spamcon.org> puked:
Prove what? That he suggested it was a possibility? Read the article
yourself. As for proving that there was previous warming, the
government has no interest in finding out the truth. They just want
some half baked science to sell you and me on cap and trade to fund
the UN.
That's what the whole debate SHOULD be about.
Oh, and I have an electric car. Do YOU have an electric car?
>
>> I guess those boiling cauldrons of oil they were pouring over the
>> castle walls was the cause of that "global warming"...
>
>No.
--
lab~rat >:-)
<ta...@kernsholler.net> puked:
>On Feb 15, 11:46ÔøΩam, znuybv <tjwil...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> On Feb 15, 10:30ÔøΩam, Tater Gumfries <ta...@kernsholler.net> wrote:
>>
>> > On Feb 14, 10:40ÔøΩpm, 1-20-2013 <01202...@obamas-lastday.com> wrote:
>>
>> > > Neoconis_Ignoramus wrote:
>> > > > I know you're retarded, so I'll try to make this as simple as
>> > > > possible.
>>
>> > > You can always tell when the liberal is going into "usenet rage" mode
>> > > when they start with the profanities and vulgar language ;^D
>>
>> > He tried to educate you about the meaning os "statistical
>> > significance".
>>
>> > You should have paid attention.
>>
>> > Tater
>>
>> Climategate U-turn as scientist at centre of row admits: There has
>> been no global warming since 1995http://snipurl.com/udioz
>
>You still don't understand "statistical significance".
>
>That should be EXTREMELY embarrassing for someone arguing about a
>sscientific matter.
>
>Tater
The phrase we're wrangling here is "NO statistical significance"...
Tater Gumfries
> On Mon, 15 Feb 2010 23:21:23 -0800 (PST), Tater Gumfries
> <ta...@kernsholler.net> puked:
>
>
>
> >> On Feb 15, 10:30Êam, Tater Gumfries <ta...@kernsholler.net> wrote:
>
> >> > On Feb 14, 10:40Êpm, 1-20-2013 <01202...@obamas-lastday.com> wrote:
>
> >> > > Neoconis_Ignoramus wrote:
> >> > > > I know you're retarded, so I'll try to make this as simple as
> >> > > > possible.
>
> >> > > You can always tell when the liberal is going into "usenet rage" mode
> >> > > when they start with the profanities and vulgar language ;^D
>
> >> > He tried to educate you about the meaning os "statistical
> >> > significance".
>
> >> > You should have paid attention.
>
> >> > Tater
>
> >> Climategate U-turn as scientist at centre of row admits: There has
> >> been no global warming since 1995http://snipurl.com/udioz
>
> >You still don't understand "statistical significance".
>
> >That should be EXTREMELY embarrassing for someone arguing about a
> >sscientific matter.
>
> >Tater
>
> The phrase we're wrangling here is "NO statistical significance"...
Which has a specific meaning, like not guilty. A verdict of "not
guilty" does not mean the accused is innocent. It means that guilt has
not been proved within a reasonable doubt. Police detectives may still
believe the evidence points to guilt, and even keep pursuing the case.
And "no statistical significance" means that the observations do not
fall into a range in which we have a 95% or better confidence
(different confidence intervals are used depending on the study) that
they resulted from the underlying mechanism we proposed as part of the
statistical test, and not chance, noise in the observations, human
error, or other uncertainty. The claim is that Phil Jones said there
is no warming. That is not the case. He said there is no statistically
significant warming, and gave the caveat that the temperatures
recorded indicated warming, but not at a statistically significant
level.
If you need a refresher, this is pretty good:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confidence_interval
It is not a good idea to extrapolate from scientific language to
laymen's terms unless you know what the scientific language actually
means. In this case, the OP clearly either does not know, or is
seeking to deceive.
Tater
lab~rat >:-)
<last...@LyingLeftistsare.invalid> puked:
>On Tue, 16 Feb 2010 09:10:44 -0500, "lab~rat >:-)" <ch...@cheeze.net>
>wrote:
>Oh they asked him about it. And he danced all around it talkingabout
>how there is no proof that the Midieval warm period was global.
>Becuase if it were a global event then today's temps would not be
>unprecedented.
>
>"G - There is a debate over whether the Medieval Warm Period (MWP) was
>global or not. If it were to be conclusively shown that it was a
>global phenomenon, would you accept that this would undermine the
>premise that mean surface atmospheric temperatures during the latter
>part of the 20th Century were unprecedented?
>
>There is much debate over whether the Medieval Warm Period was global
>in extent or not. The MWP is most clearly expressed in parts of North
>America, the North Atlantic and Europe and parts of Asia. For it to be
>global in extent the MWP would need to be seen clearly in more records
>from the tropical regions and the Southern Hemisphere. There are very
>few palaeoclimatic records for these latter two regions.
>
>Of course, if the MWP was shown to be global in extent and as warm or
>warmer than today (based on an equivalent coverage over the NH and SH)
>then obviously the late-20th century warmth would not be
>unprecedented. On the other hand, if the MWP was global, but was less
>warm that today, then current warmth would be unprecedented. "
So here's the question, is data to support the MWP in the southern
hemisphere being sought? If no, why?
lab~rat >:-)
<ta...@kernsholler.net> puked:
>On Feb 16, 7:14ÔøΩam, "lab~rat >:-)" <ch...@cheeze.net> wrote:
>> On Mon, 15 Feb 2010 23:21:23 -0800 (PST), Tater Gumfries
>> <ta...@kernsholler.net> puked:
>>
>>
>>
>> >On Feb 15, 11:46ÔøΩam, znuybv <tjwil...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> >> On Feb 15, 10:30ÔøΩam, Tater Gumfries <ta...@kernsholler.net> wrote:
Right. And in the same article, he cited the fact that over the past
9/10s of a decade, the earth was actually trending to be *cooler*,
although there was no statistical significance to the amount.
However, he placed greater weight on the study that was 10/10s of a
decade.
I guess the point is that after years of global temperature rise of no
statistical significance, we're experiencing a period of cooling that
is of no statistical significance.
>
>If you need a refresher, this is pretty good:
>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confidence_interval
I'm familiar with this.
>
>It is not a good idea to extrapolate from scientific language to
>laymen's terms unless you know what the scientific language actually
>means. In this case, the OP clearly either does not know, or is
>seeking to deceive.
>
>Tater
--
Eddie Haskell
"Neoconis_Ignoramus" <bella...@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:fb094aae-ce4e-481f...@s33g2000prm.googlegroups.com...
> >> Yet *another* devastating blow to the tree-hugging liberals that SO
> >> want
> >> manmade gw/cc to be true!!!!
>
> >> Each and every day the concept of manmade global warming/climate change
> >> becomes more of a complete joke ;^D
>
>
> >> Climategate U-turn as scientist at centre of row admits: There has been
> >> no global warming since 1995
>
>
> >> Data: Professor Phil Jones admitted his record keeping is 'not as good
> >> as it should be'
>
> >> The academic at the centre of the Climategate affair, whose raw data
> >> is crucial to the theory of climate change, has admitted that he has
> >> trouble keeping track of the information.
>
> >> Colleagues say that the reason Professor Phil Jones has refused Freedom
> >> of Information requests is that he may have actually lost the relevant
> >> papers.
>
> >> Professor Jones told the BBC yesterday there was truth in the
> >> observations of colleagues that he lacked organisational skills, that
> >> his office was swamped with piles of paper and that his record keeping
> >> is not as good as it should be .
>
> >> The data is crucial to the famous hockey stick graph used by climate
> >> change advocates to support the theory.
>
> >> Professor Jones also conceded the possibility that the world was warmer
> >> in medieval times than now suggesting global warming may not be a
> >> man-made phenomenon.
>
> >> And he said that for the past 15 years there has been no statistically
> >> significant warming.
>
> >> The admissions will be seized on by sceptics as fresh evidence that
> >> there are serious flaws at the heart of the science of climate change
> >> and the orthodoxy that recent rises in temperature are largely
> >> man-made.
>
> >> Professor Jones has been in the spotlight since he stepped down as
> >> director of the University of East Anglia s Climatic Research Unit
> >> after
> >> the leaking of emails that skeptics claim show scientists were
> >> manipulating data.
>
> >> The raw data, collected from hundreds of weather stations around the
> >> world and analysed by his unit, has been used for years to bolster
> >> efforts by the United Nation s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
> >> Change
> >> to press governments to cut carbon dioxide emissions.
>
> >> Following the leak of the emails, Professor Jones has been accused of
> >> scientific fraud for allegedly deliberately suppressing information
> >> and refusing to share vital data with critics.
>
> >> Discussing the interview, the BBC s environmental analyst Roger
> >> Harrabin
> >> said he had spoken to colleagues of Professor Jones who had told him
> >> that his strengths included integrity and doggedness but not
> >> record-keeping and office tidying.
>
> >> Mr Harrabin, who conducted the interview for the BBC s website, said
> >> the
> >> professor had been collating tens of thousands of pieces of data from
> >> around the world to produce a coherent record of temperature change.
>
> >> That material has been used to produce the hockey stick graph which is
> >> relatively flat for centuries before rising steeply in recent decades.
>
> >> According to Mr Harrabin, colleagues of Professor Jones said his office
> >> is piled high with paper, fragments from over the years, tens of
> >> thousands of pieces of paper, and they suspect what happened was he
> >> took
> >> in the raw data to a central database and then let the pieces of paper
> >> go because he never realised that 20 years later he would be held to
> >> account over them .
>
> >> Asked by Mr Harrabin about these issues, Professor Jones admitted the
> >> lack of organisation in the system had contributed to his reluctance to
> >> share data with critics, which he regretted.
>
> >> But he denied he had cheated over the data or unfairly influenced the
> >> scientific process, and said he still believed recent temperature rises
> >> were predominantly man-made.
>
> >> Asked about whether he lost track of data, Professor Jones said: There
> >> is some truth in that. We do have a trail of where the weather stations
> >> have come from but it s probably not as good as it should be.
>
> >> There s a continual updating of the dataset. Keeping track of
> >> everything is difficult. Some countries will do lots of checking on
> >> their data then issue improved data, so it can be very difficult. We
> >> have improved but we have to improve more.
>
> >> He also agreed that there had been two periods which experienced
> >> similar
> >> warming, from 1910 to 1940 and from 1975 to 1998, but said these could
> >> be explained by natural phenomena whereas more recent warming could
> >> not.
>
> >> He further admitted that in the last 15 years there had been no
> >> statistically significant warming, although he argued this was a blip
> >> rather than the long-term trend.
>
> >> And he said that the debate over whether the world could have been even
> >> warmer than now during the medieval period, when there is evidence of
> >> high temperatures in northern countries, was far from settled.
>
> >> Sceptics believe there is strong evidence that the world was warmer
> >> between about 800 and 1300 AD than now because of evidence of high
> >> temperatures in northern countries.
>
> >> But climate change advocates have dismissed this as false or only
> >> applying to the northern part of the world.
>
> >> Professor Jones departed from this consensus when he said: There is
> >> much debate over whether the Medieval Warm Period was global in extent
> >> or not. The MWP is most clearly expressed in parts of North America,
> >> the
> >> North Atlantic and Europe and parts of Asia.
>
> >> more records from the tropical regions and the Southern hemisphere.
> >> There are very few palaeoclimatic records for these latter two regions.
>
> >> Of course, if the MWP was shown to be global in extent and as warm or
> >> be unprecedented. On the other hand, if the MWP was global, but was
> >> less
>
> >> Sceptics said this was the first time a senior scientist working with
> >> the IPCC had admitted to the possibility that the Medieval Warming
> >> Period could have been global, and therefore the world could have been
> >> hotter then than now.
>
> >> Professor Jones criticised those who complained he had not shared his
> >> data with them, saying they could always collate their own from
> >> publicly
> >> available material in the US. And he said the climate had not cooled
> >> until recently and then barely at all. The trend is a warming trend .
>
> >> Mr Harrabin told Radio 4 s Today programme that, despite the
> >> controversies, there still appeared to be no fundamental flaws in the
> >> majority scientific view that climate change was largely man-made.
>
> >> But Dr Benny Pieser, director of the sceptical Global Warming Policy
> >> Foundation, said Professor Jones s excuses for his failure to share
> >> data were hollow as he had shared it with colleagues and mates .
>
> >> He said that until all the data was released, sceptics could not test
> >> it
> >> to see if it supported the conclusions claimed by climate change
> >> advocates.
>
> >> He added that the professor s concessions over medieval warming were
> >> significant because they were his first public admission that the
> >> science was not settled.
> >> _________________________________________________
> >> Manmade global warming/climate change now has all the credibility that
> >> the luck astrology mood ring had back in the '70's ;^D LOL!!!!!!
>
> > I know you're retarded, so I'll try to make this as simple as
> > possible.
>
> You can always tell when the liberal is going into "usenet rage" mode
> when they start with the profanities and vulgar language ;^D
>
> kook that is simply devastated that his manmade GW/CC dream is now being
> exposed as a complete and utter fraud.
>
> Hope this helps!!!!! ;^D- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
> Complete and utter inability to respond in any way whatsoever to
> (more) facts noted, dipshit. Probably just went right over your head,
> just like all sciency-like things do, and you quit upon encountering
> the first 3 syllable word.
Face it, ignoramus. Your cooked data, phony glacial melting, big government,
wealth redistribution ruse has been cracked wide open. It's over. The forces
of evil have been vanished. You're finished. Done, and there's nothing you
can do about it.
Now, get the fuck over it.
-Eddie Haskell
Eddie Haskell
>
> Awww, come-on, Cheer up little guy. You're fellow liberal tree-huggers
> will surely manufacture another "crisis" that you can latch onto.....now
>
> - Show quoted text -
> Translated: Science is too hard for my stupid ass. Therefore I'll
> just believe that AGW is all a giant hoax.
Translation: Oh god. They're on to us. They figured out that the so-called
science is really just a corrupted predetermined government funded ruse to
grow government and I was so hoping for more government cheese out of the
hoax.
I what my mommy government! I want my mommy government! Wah.. Wah..
-Eddie Haskell
Bill Baker
message news:<lv8ln5lb85294eaj0...@4ax.com>
> On Tue, 16 Feb 2010 03:09:12 -0500, Bill Baker
> <wba...@postini.spamcon.org> puked:
>
>>> I wish it would warm up here. Man, it's *COLD* outside!!!!
>>
>>Global warming does not mean that the winter season is canceled, dumbfuck.
>>In fact, it does mean that we are likely to see more extreme weather like
>>the unprecedented snowstorms here in the Midwest.
>
> I love that one. It's just like something out of 1984. You guys are
> so precious...
Not at all. It's just simple science.
Bill Baker
message news:<c19ln5d0sdu01ksa1...@4ax.com>
But precipitation in locally cold regions turns out to be snow.