global warming data...garbage in...

[CanuckMA]

But they fit 2 of every other living thing in approximately 101,000 square feet.

Well the stupid bugs didn't take much room.

And some of the bigger things were not on board...

 

[Xue Sheng]

Well the stupid bugs didn't take much room.

But DAMN they were annoying

 

[WC_lun]

I wonder how many breeds of misquitoes were killed out of reaction slaps?

 

[Xue Sheng]

I wonder how many breeds of misquitoes were killed out of reaction slaps?

Obviously not enough :EG:

 

[Xue Sheng]

Its melting...or at least not freezing as much

Who knows...maybe we will find the ark as things melt :uhyeah:

 

[billc]

Well, it may be that NASA was caught changing historical temperature data on it's site to make warming look more real. Is this true?

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2012/09/nasas_rubber_ruler.html

We've been hearing that 2012 has been the "hottest on record." I had written earlier that those claims were based on the contiguous United States only, or 1.5% of the earth's surface. The "global temperature" in 2012 through June was only the 10[SUP]th[/SUP] hottest on record. In fact, every single month of 1998 was warmer than the corresponding month of 2012.

I thought I'd update that analysis to include July's and August's temperatures. To my surprise, NASA's entire temperature record, going back to January 1880, changed between NASA's June update and its August update. I could not just add two more numbers to my spreadsheet. The entire spreadsheet needed to be updated.

I knew NASA would occasionally update its estimates, even its historical estimates. I found that unsettling when I first heard about it. But I thought such re-estimates were rare, and transparent. There is absolutely no transparency here. If I had not kept a copy of the data taken off NASA's web site two months ago, I would not have known it had changed. NASA does not make available previous versions of its temperature record (to my knowledge).

NASA does summarize its "updates to analysis," but the last update it describes was in February. The data I looked at changed sometime after early July.

​

In short, the data that NASA makes available to the public, temperatures over the last 130 years, can change at any time, without warning and without explanation. Yes, the global temperature of January 1880 changed some time between July and September 2012.

Surprise of surprise, the change had the effect of making the long-term temperature record support conclusions of faster warming. The biggest changes were mostly pre-1963 temperatures; they were generally adjusted down. That would make the warming trend steeper, since post-1963 temperatures were adjusted slightly upward, on average. Generally, the older the data, the more adjustment.

​

Hmmm...soooo...if this is true, then why should anyone trust what the "scientists" say is happening with the weather/climate? Is NASA doing this in order to get it's budget increased to "study" global warming?

And about that global warming thing and that arctic sea ice thing the alarmists keep harping on...

You might also be interested to know that Antarctic sea ice set another record in September: the most amount of ice ever recorded.

Once again, the basic global warming story, even after our hot summer in the US, is the same as I described in May. "In short, the data show nothing alarming at all: very mild warming over the long term, and actual cooling over the short term."

The article on the sea ice record...

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamestaylor/2012/09/19/antarctic-sea-ice-sets-another-record/

Editor’s note: An update from the author has been added to this article on September 20, 2012.

Antarctic sea ice set another record this past week, with the most amount of ice ever recorded on day 256 of the calendar year (September 12 of this leap year). Please, nobody tell the mainstream media or they might have to retract some stories and admit they are misrepresenting scientific data.
Good News For Polar Bears Is Bad News for Global Warming Alarmists James Taylor Contributor
Don't Believe The Global Warmists, Major Hurricanes Are Less Frequent James Taylor Contributor
National Public Radio (NPR) published an article on its website last month claiming, “Ten years ago, a piece of ice the size of Rhode Island disintegrated and melted in the waters off Antarctica. Two other massive ice shelves along the Antarctic Peninsula had suffered similar fates a few years before. The events became poster children for the effects of global warming. … There’s no question that unusually warm air triggered the final demise of these huge chunks of ice.”
NPR failed to mention anywhere in its article that Antarctic sea ice has been growing since satellites first began measuring the ice 33 years ago and the sea ice has been above the 33-year average throughout 2012.

​

 

[WC_lun]

Not true.

 

[Xue Sheng]

To quote Bugs Bunny

Hold your seats, folks, here we go again!

 

[billc]

Hmmm...

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamestaylor/2012/09/19/antarctic-sea-ice-sets-another-record/

Update: To provide more perspective on global warming and Antarctica, I would like to update this column with some additional information:
As meteorologist Anthony Watts explains, new data show ice mass is accumulating on the Antarctic continent as well as in the ocean surrounding Antarctica. The new data contradict an assertion by global warming alarmists that the expanding Antarctic sea ice is coming at the expense of a decline in Antarctic continental ice.
The new data also add context to sensationalist media stories about declining ice in small portions of Antarctica, such as portions of West Antarctica and the Antarctic Peninsula (see here, for example). The mainstream media frequently publish stories focusing on ice loss in these two areas, yet the media stories rarely if ever mention that ice is accumulating over the larger area of East Antarctica and that the continent as a whole is gaining snow and ice mass.
Interestingly, a new NASA study finds Antarctica once supported vegetation similar to that of present-day Iceland.
“The southward movements of rain bands associated with a warmer climate in the high-latitude southern hemisphere made the margins of Antarctica less like a polar desert, and more like present-day Iceland,” a co-author of the NASA study reports.

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/09/...ins-of-the-antarctic-ice-sheet-exceed-losses/

[h=1]ICESAT Data Shows Mass Gains of the Antarctic Ice Sheet Exceed Losses[/h]Posted on September 10, 2012 by Anthony Watts

The results of ICEsat measurements are in for Antarctica, and it seems those claims of ice mass loss in Antarctica have melted now that a continent wide tally has been made. This was presented in the SCAR ISMASS Workshop in Portland, OR, July 14, 2012 and was added to NASA’s Technical Reports server on September 7th, 2012. H/T to WUWT reader “Brad”. What’s interesting (besides the result) is that the report was prepared by Jay Zwally, whose “ice free Arctic by the end of summer 2012″ prediction is about to be tested in 12 days. It also puts the kibosh on GRACE studies that suggested a net loss in Antarctica. Note there’s the mention of the “climate warming, consistent with model predictions” at the end of the report. They’d say the same thing if ICEsat had measured loss instead of gain, because as we’ve seen before, almost everything is consistent with warming and models no matter which direction it goes.
Here’s the video presentation. The report abstract follows.


Mass Balance of the Antarctic Ice Sheet 1992-2008 from ERS and ICESat: Gains exceed losses – Presented by Jay Zwally, NASA Goddard, USA ISMASS 2012 is an activity of the renewed SCAR/IASC ISMASS expert group, which focuses on the mass balance of ice-sheets and their contribution to sea level changes. The workshop is sponsored by ICSU, SCAR, IASC, WCRP, IGS, and IACS with support from CliC and APECS. Video recording and editing provided by Kristin Poinar, Mai Winstrup, and Jenny Baeseman

 

[Master Dan]

Trying to tell right wing or low informed Republicans that global warming exists is a waste of time but I just love how uneducated non sicience people want to jump on conspiracy or other GOP Republican Oil company propaganda BILL BILL BILL that it does not exist!! Bull **** which one of you here live 100 miles below the Arctic Circle or with in 700 miles of the North pole since 1995 and lived it and have engineering experience none of you who Poo Poo global warming. Your as unqualified to vote in the election as you are to speak for the planet.

My daughter and I just picked up a person who brought his smaill sail boat from France here through the North West Passage and he found no Ice and yet you beliec NOAH and all the satellite images are fake ESAD like I said before when your house burns up or drowns and you have not food is when regardless of believe it or not there will be less of you idiots alive for the rest of us to deal with while trying to fix it and run off the corporations that want to exploit the planet at the cost of lives.

 

[Master Dan]

well, it may be that nasa was caught changing historical temperature data on it's site to make warming look more real. Is this true?

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2012/09/nasas_rubber_ruler.html

​

hmmm...soooo...if this is true, then why should anyone trust what the "scientists" say is happening with the weather/climate? Is nasa doing this in order to get it's budget increased to "study" global warming?

and about that global warming thing and that arctic sea ice thing the alarmists keep harping on...

the article on the sea ice record...

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamestaylor/2012/09/19/antarctic-sea-ice-sets-another-record/


​

hey bill these two guys didn't believe in global warming either yourin good company?

View attachment 17328View attachment 17329

 

[billc]

About man made global warming and loss of ice...lose it in one place and it build in another place...

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/experts-global-warming-means-more-antarctic-ice

While the North Pole has been losing sea ice over the years, the water nearest the South Pole has been gaining it. Antarctic sea ice hit a record 7.51 million square miles in September. That happened just days after reports of the biggest loss of Arctic sea ice on record.

I love it when global warming causes less ice...and more ice...at the same time. What a joke.

 

[elder999]

About man made global warming and loss of ice...lose it in one place and it build in another place...

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/experts-global-warming-means-more-antarctic-ice


I love it when global warming causes less ice...and more ice...at the same time. What a joke.

Of course, it would help if you actually read the article:

Climate change skeptics have seized on the Antarctic ice to argue that the globe isn't warming and that scientists are ignoring the southern continent because it's not convenient. But scientists say the skeptics are misinterpreting what's happening and why.

Shifts in wind patterns and the giant ozone hole over the Antarctic this time of year — both related to human activity — are probably behind the increase in ice, experts say. This subtle growth in winter sea ice since scientists began measuring it in 1979 was initially surprising, they say, but makes sense the more it is studied.

"A warming world can have complex and sometimes surprising consequences," researcher Ted Maksym said this week from an Australian research vessel surrounded by Antarctic sea ice. He is with the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution in Massachusetts.

Many experts agree. Ted Scambos of the National Snow and Ice Data Center in Colorado adds: "It sounds counterintuitive, but the Antarctic is part of the warming as well."

And on a third continent, David Vaughan of the British Antarctic Survey says that yes, what's happening in Antarctica bears the fingerprints of man-made climate change.

and, by way of explanation:

While the Arctic is open ocean encircled by land, the Antarctic — about 1.5 times the size of the U.S. — is land circled by ocean, leaving more room for sea ice to spread. That geography makes a dramatic difference in the two polar climates.
The Arctic ice responds more directly to warmth. In the Antarctic, the main driver is wind, Maksym and other scientists say. Changes in the strength and motion of winds are now pushing the ice farther north, extending its reach.

Those changes in wind are tied in a complicated way to climate change from greenhouse gases, Maksym and Scambos say. Climate change has created essentially a wall of wind that keeps cool weather bottled up in Antarctica, NASA's Abdalati says.

And the wind works in combination with the ozone hole, the huge gap in Earth's protective ozone layer that usually appears over the South Pole. It's bigger than North America.

Of course, given its counterintuitive nature, it could easily seem ridiculous-maybe, even "a joke"-to a non-scientist.....

 

[CanuckMA]

Now, now, elder, don't you try to inject science and logic in a good copy-pasta rant.

 

[Xue Sheng]

As I suspected (and said), some people...bill.... do not have a clue as to what "Global Warming" means or does.

I will try and keep this simple

Some places that were once cold get warmer while other places that were once warm get colder....it is called climate change…this means weather patterns change…. so lets review... places that were warm get colder and places that were cold get warmer and in addition to that some places that were warm get warmer and some places that were cold get colder…and that is as simple as I can make it for you

What global warming doesn't mean...... the entire surface of the planet...every square inch...gets warmer... so even though you may think it is a joke that some place loose ice while others gain ice and that based on this Global Warming is itself a joke... you would be incredibly wrong… thereby proving you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about in this thread as it applies to Global warming


Now I am pretty darn sure elder understands this but bill…take a look at this…. this is the oceanic conveyor belt system (for bill) the thermohaline circulation (for elder )… think of it kind of like a big wet HVAC system

Introduce enough fresh water (melting ice) into this system and it will shut down… now what do you think happens if it stops circulating and stops moving warm (red) and cold (blue) water around…well places that were cold get colder some that were hot get hotter some that were cold get warmer and some that were warm get colder…. And this has major effects on weather patterns and then it gets too complicated for me to explain simply… and that is just one factor in the equation


Sheesh…how many times do I have to explain Global Warming on MT….

 

[Flying Crane]

As I suspected (and said), some people...bill.... do not have a clue as to what "Global Warming" means or does.

I will try and keep this simple

Some places that were once cold get warmer while other places that were once warm get colder....it is called climate change…this means weather patterns change…. so lets review... places that were warm get colder and places that were cold get warmer and in addition to that some places that were warm get warmer and some places that were cold get colder…and that is as simple as I can make it for you

What global warming doesn't mean...... the entire surface of the planet...every square inch...gets warmer... so even though you may think it is a joke that some place loose ice while others gain ice and that based on this Global Warming is itself a joke... you would be incredibly wrong… thereby proving you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about in this thread as it applies to Global warming

Sheesh…how many times do I have to explain Global Warming on MT….

Xue, Bill lacks the capacity.

 

[WC_lun]

Wow BillC, even the links you are posting now support climate change that is man made. Just out of curiousity, is there any doubt in your mind that climate change is man made now, or are you still denying the science?

 

[billc]

I don't believe the "science." If it was such a lock, then the "scientists," wouldn't have had to fake data, try to destroy the skeptics by keeping them out of scientific journals, try to get editors who allow skeptics to publish, fired. Climate gate the first revelation and the second revelation have destroyed any credibility the "man made" global warming theory had. "Scientists," and their friends faking photographs of glaciers melting, lying about glacier melt and all the other things they have been caught doing to convince people that the science is legitimate just doesn't convince me. The fact that past data put into the computer models can't tell us about the weather we already know about is another clue that there is a problem with the "science." Too many skeptics, too little honesty among the proponents and you have too much room for the theory to be wrong.

Even elder gets it wrong. He posts pictures of a flooded city, and points to an Island that is supposed to be sinking, you look into it and you find that it isn't sinking, the old measuring equipment was wrong, the new equipment shows no sinking. So no, the science isn't settled.

 

[shesulsa]

You won't have to believe it within the next few years.

Sent from my MB886 using Tapatalk 2

 

[elder999]

Even elder gets it wrong. He posts pictures of a flooded city, and points to an Island that is supposed to be sinking, you look into it and you find that it isn't sinking, the old measuring equipment was wrong, the new equipment shows no sinking. So no, the science isn't settled.

There are no "cities" on Tuvalu-it's all villages, and that's the picutre I posted.You're right, though.Tuvalu isn't sinking.

The sea is rising

This is an incontravertible, settled fact. So much so that Tuvalu is planning for their inevitable evacuation.

The dazzling white sand and dark green coconut palms of Tepuka Savilivili were much like those on dozens of other small islets within sight of Funafuti, the atoll capital of Tuvalu. But shortly after cyclones Gavin, Hina and Kelly had paid the tiny Pacific nation a visit, islanders looked across Funafuti's coral lagoon and noticed a gap on the horizon. Tepuka Savilivili had vanished. Fifty hectares of Tuvalu disappeared into the sea during the 1997 storms. The tiny country's precious 10 square miles of land were starting to disappear.

Five years on, the government of Tuvalu has noticed many such troubling changes on its nine inhabited islands and concluded that, as one of the smallest and lowest-lying countries in the world, it is destined to become the first nation sunk by global warming. The evidence before their own eyes - and forecasts for a rise in sea level of up to 88cm in the next century made by international scientists - has convinced most of Tuvalu's 10,500 inhabitants that rising seas and more frequent violent storms are certain to make life unliveable on the islands, if not for them, then for their children. A deal has been signed with New Zealand, in which 75 Tuvaluans will be resettled there each year, starting now. As the vast expanse of the Pacific Ocean creeps up on to Tuvalu's doorstep, the evacuation and shutting down of a nation has begun.