climate change

rexlunae

New member
Do you know that NOAA used to supply a feed to organizations like PBS that showed record highs, lows, rain, & snowfall?

For some reason in 2013 NOAA stopped supplying the feed that showed record lows.

Ooh, how nefarious.

NOAA had no problem providing a map showing record highs, but since 2013 NOAA has a problem providing a map showing record lows.

Why do you think they did this?

I don't really know what data feed you're talking about, and you didn't offer a source, so I honestly have no idea.
 

rocketman

Resident Rocket Surgeon
Hall of Fame
More lies from the past...

screenhunter_389-may-21-04-08.jpg


A graph from the National academy of sciences Science News for Barbie being he loves the useless model graphs.

screenhunter_394-may-21-04-37.jpg


screenhunter_165-feb-10-06-30.jpg


By this record we should be in an ice age no?

screenhunter_36-feb-07-00-051-1.gif


I got a bunch more...
 

tetelestai

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
I don't really know what data feed you're talking about, and you didn't offer a source, so I honestly have no idea.

NOAA runs the "National Climate Data Center". After February 3, 2014 NCDC stopped providing record high/low temps.

From Feb 3, 2014:

image_thumb108.png


Then for 6 months the site looked like this:

image_thumb109.png


***As of last month, the site is back up again.
 

rocketman

Resident Rocket Surgeon
Hall of Fame
(Rocket learns that most climatologists in the 70s, worried about global warming)

(Rocket counters with a newspaper article citing unnamed "scientists.")

Yep. But marginally better than big cartoons, and posting faked magazine covers, I suppose.

The newspapers did not seem to care about naming them back then, yet they had the same credibility then that you subscribe the so-called experts now. You are just as gullible and duped as they were then so, why should you care what the names of the experts were back then you would believe them anyway... BTW they were not worried about warming you dope they were proclaiming an ice age but, warm is the new cold right?
 

rocketman

Resident Rocket Surgeon
Hall of Fame
NOAA runs the "National Climate Data Center". After February 3, 2014 NCDC stopped providing record high/low temps.

That is because people were keeping track and it didn't jive with the bullcrap they were feeding the masses.
 

The Barbarian

BANNED
Banned
(Rocket learns that most climatologists in the 70s, worried about global warming)

(Rocket counters with a newspaper article citing unnamed "scientists.")

Yep. But marginally better than big cartoons, and posting faked magazine covers, I suppose.

The newspapers did not seem to care about naming them back then

How convenient.

yet they had the same credibility then that you subscribe the so-called experts now.

Nope. I was in science then. If it wasn't in the peer-reviewed literature, it lacked credibility. Particularly anonymous experts in newspaper stories.

You are just as gullible and duped as they were then so

You probably should be a bit subdued when "gullible" and "duped" come up. Who was it who was suckered into posting that faked magazine cover, in an attempt to show that scientists once worried about cooling?

why should you care what the names of the experts were back then you would believe them anyway.

You still don't get it. It's evidence, not experts that produces credibility.

BTW they were not worried about warming you dope

You forget that I was in science back then. Oops. Even then, they were overwhelmingly concerned about warming. Let's see...

One myth that's been hibernating, but has recently resurfaced back into popular discussion, is the idea that back in the 1970s, climate scientists were united in predicting global cooling...The rationale goes this way: the fact that scientists were once supposedly so concerned about global cooling, which didn’t come true, just shows that we shouldn’t worry about the new fears of climate change.

But as John Cook points out over at Skeptical Science, global cooling was much more an invention of the media than it was a real scientific concern. A survey of peer-reviewed scientific papers published between 1965 and 1979 shows that the large majority of research at the time predicted that the earth would warm as carbon-dioxide levels rose — as indeed it has.

http://www.realclearscience.com/blog/2014/01/the_myth_of_the_global_cooling_consensus.html

The Myth of the 1970s Global Cooling Scientific Consensus
Thomas C. Peterson

NOAA/National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, North Carolina
William M. Connolley

British Antarctic Survey, National Environment Research Council, Cambridge, United Kingdom
John Fleck

Albuquerque Journal, Albuquerque, New Mexico



Abstract

Climate science as we know it today did not exist in the 1960s and 1970s. The integrated enterprise embodied in the Nobel Prizewinning work of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change existed then as separate threads of research pursued by isolated groups of scientists. Atmospheric chemists and modelers grappled with the measurement of changes in carbon dioxide and atmospheric gases, and the changes in climate that might result. Meanwhile, geologists and paleoclimate researchers tried to understand when Earth slipped into and out of ice ages, and why. An enduring popular myth suggests that in the 1970s the climate science community was predicting “global cooling” and an “imminent” ice age, an observation frequently used by those who would undermine what climate scientists say today about the prospect of global warming. A review of the literature suggests that, on the contrary, greenhouse warming even then dominated scientists' thinking as being one of the most important forces shaping Earth's climate on human time scales. More importantly than showing the falsehood of the myth, this review describes how scientists of the time built the foundation on which the cohesive enterprise of modern climate science now rests.

http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/abs/10.1175/2008BAMS2370.1

they were proclaiming an ice age but, warm is the new cold right?

See above. You've been had once again.
 

tetelestai

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
That is because people were keeping track and it didn't jive with the bullcrap they were feeding the masses.

Correct.

Like I said earlier, the feed from NCDC was used by PBS. PBS called their site "The Widget". Here is what PBS said about their site:

"We’ve built this widget so our viewers can understand the significance of the heat, not only in terms of raw degrees, but in a format that compares today’s temperatures to previous record highs"

Now that the record lows are far greater than the record highs, NCDC and PBS have changed their websites.

See, when we had the record highs, we were told over and over again it was because of man made global warming. But now that we have record lows, it's just weather.

The man made global warming hoax proponents are caught in their lies over and over again.
 

PhilipJames

New member
Eugenics anyone?

No takers?

Here is what happens when junk science is embraced by a large portion of the 'scientific' community and political classes:

Eugenics, the science of improving the human race by scientific control of breeding, was viewed by a large segment of scientists for almost one hundred years as an important, if not a major means of producing paradise on earth.

http://ed5015.tripod.com/BEugenics72Bergman73Potter77.htm

PJ
 

rocketman

Resident Rocket Surgeon
Hall of Fame
Correct.

Like I said earlier, the feed from NCDC was used by PBS. PBS called their site "The Widget". Here is what PBS said about their site:

"We’ve built this widget so our viewers can understand the significance of the heat, not only in terms of raw degrees, but in a format that compares today’s temperatures to previous record highs"

Now that the record lows are far greater than the record highs, NCDC and PBS have changed their websites.

See, when we had the record highs, we were told over and over again it was because of man made global warming. But now that we have record lows, it's just weather.

The man made global warming hoax proponents are caught in their lies over and over again.

Preaching to the choir Tet, I know and I agree...
 

rexlunae

New member
NOAA runs the "National Climate Data Center". After February 3, 2014 NCDC stopped providing record high/low temps.

From Feb 3, 2014:

image_thumb108.png


Then for 6 months the site looked like this:

image_thumb109.png


***As of last month, the site is back up again.

So, it was gone for 8 months?
 

tetelestai

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
As I type this, it's 28 degrees here in Pittsburgh. The all time record low for November 2nd and November 3rd is 26 degrees.

Could break the record in a few hours.

Must be all the CO2 trapping the heat.
 

jgarden

BANNED
Banned
Based on post #559, "tetelestai" should believe in a flat-earth, geocentric universe because a literal interpretation of the Bible supports it and Galileo (and his successors) who advocated a heliocentric one were condemned as heretics by the Church!
 

PhilipJames

New member
Based on post #559, "tetelestai" should believe in a flat-earth, geocentric universe because a literal interpretation of the Bible supports it and Galileo (and his successors) who advocated a heliocentric one were condemned as heretics by the Church!


Just as anyone who proposes another theory aside from 'man made global warming' to fit the data is condemned as a denier regardless of whether the theory is more justifiable ....


Peace!
PJ
 

tetelestai

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
Based on post #559, "tetelestai" should believe in a flat-earth, geocentric universe


There has never been a society that advocated a "flat earth". "Flat earth" is a strawman made up by Progressive Liberals.

If you really think a society existed that advocated a flat earth, please show us who they were.

As for geocentrism, Einstein said neither geocentrism, nor heliocentrism could be proven true or false. Einstein said both Ptolemy and Galileo were correct.

Using Einstein's theory of relativity, either can be proven true.

I can show you more people with PhD's in astronomy who advocate geocentrism, than I can show climatologists who disagree with man made global warming.
 
Top