totally different story than you hear put out
http://www.drroyspencer.com/2017/01/global-satellites-2016-not-statistically-warmer-than-1998/
http://www.drroyspencer.com/2017/01/global-satellites-2016-not-statistically-warmer-than-1998/
I'll stick to whatever I want, thanks. If you want to dispute the facts presented, have at it. I have no time for info from the in crowd that has been proven to manipulate data to suit their agenda. You may want to forget climategate, but I'm not. No wonder they want "peer reviewed" stuff out, the "peer's are all in on the political scaremongering hysteria.
Again, even IF it was all true and mostly manmade(big problems with that), the solutions put out by the Al Gore's, Obama's, UN, etc. are horrible for us. No thanks. It wouldn't matter much at all and the costs would be astronomical(already the costs have hurt many in this country).To date no one from the other side has actually published any legitimate literature regarding NOAA's manipulation of the data, this claim is utter nonsense... The NOAA data has been independently verified by buoys, satellites, and the addition of millions of new observations in ICOADS version 3 improved quality control, the EOF reconstruction, and uncertainty estimates, among other things. If you want more details refer to one of my earlier posts in this thread.
View attachment 16
Even IF, and that's a big IF, some of these suspicious numbers put out by the in crowd are right, there is no amount of money we can punish ourselves with and transfer wealth to make a real difference. Thus, it's all political. And yes, it was published, you just read it, and Dr. Roy Spencer here is one of the world experts on the satellite data and he would disagree with you very much..but for starters, stop the money drain and transfer of wealth and start using our own resources again(pipelines, coal, etc)
http://www.drroyspencer.com/2017/01...en-100-of-scientists-agree-on-global-warming/
totally different story than you hear put out
http://www.drroyspencer.com/2017/01/global-satellites-2016-not-statistically-warmer-than-1998/
Again, even IF it was all true and mostly manmade(big problems with that), the solutions put out by the Al Gore's, Obama's, UN, etc. are horrible for us. No thanks. It wouldn't matter much at all and the costs would be astronomical(already the costs have hurt many in this country).
A longer growing season helps poor people in many parts of the world too. We NEVER hear of positive impacts from any global warming.
Again, even IF it was all true and mostly manmade(big problems with that), the solutions put out by the Al Gore's, Obama's, UN, etc. are horrible for us. No thanks. It wouldn't matter much at all and the costs would be astronomical(already the costs have hurt many in this country).
http://www.cfact.org/2016/05/21/paper-scientists-obsessed-with-climate-models-that-dont-work/
Scientists are obsessed with climate models that don't work
John Christy lives here where I do, and he's what you call a "skeptic"...he doesn't buy the man made GW disaster fearmongering at all, and doesn't buy that it's settled science at all. Far from it. He works with Dr. Roy Spencer and they are two of the most outspoken critics of the UN's agenda and the massive transfer of wealth using this as an excuse that Obama and others want to do. Oh, and the video didn't even spell his name right
Dr. John Christy is a Professor of Atmospheric Science and Director of the Earth System Science Center at the University of Alabama in Huntsville (UAH). He has also been Alabama's State Climatologist since November 2000. He is mostly known for his work with the satellite-based temperature monitoring for which he and Dr. Roy Spencer received NASA’s Exceptional Scientific Achievement Medal. Christy helped draft and signed the 2003 American Geophysical Union statement on climate change [Source: Wikipedia].
Dr. Christy believes that the climate system is quite insensitive to humanity’s greenhouse gas emissions and doubts that human activity is to blame for most of the observed recent warming.
I'm sorry you don't like it, but that's just tough. The expert used could have been in any publication...so the lame excuse to trash the mail is a big fail. It's sad to see so many that have such a closed mind to what is going on and not believe anything wrong is happening with any of this related to GW. Keep your head in the sand, I don't care. Don't respond to my "trash" anymore if you don't like it.Why are you posting this crap again?
Let me just re-iterate in case I didn't make myself clear the first time... The daily mail authors have absolutely no idea what they're talking about. For starters, they don't even know how to use the same base period to compare the HADCRUT and NOAA global temperature datasets which they claim to be fraudulent because the NOAA dataset is supposedly warmer, when in fact they forgot to use the same base period to compare anomaly data for both datasets (oops!)... That elementary mistake alone discredits their entire article. Smh...
View attachment 33
I'm sorry you don't like it, but that's just tough. The expert used could have been in any publication...so the lame excuse to trash the mail is a big fail. It's sad to see so many that have such a closed mind to what is going on and not believe anything wrong is happening with any of this related to GW. Keep your head in the sand, I don't care. Don't respond to my "trash" anymore if you don't like it.