The graphs are real.
The EPA still has its graph that supports 1934 being the hottest year i the USA
Top physicist on climate change....
- Thread starter Nathon Detroit
- Start date
The graphs are real.
The EPA still has its graph that supports 1934 being the hottest year i the USA
They only changed 1934 and 1998.
They had to make 1934 cooler, and they had to make 1998 warmer, otherwise their global warming theory didn't work.
Like I said, they are not hiding the fact that they did this. They claim they did this. They claim they have better methods for calculating the temperatures of the past, so they changed them.
For the record, NASA and NOAA went back and corrected the 1934 temperatures, and admit 1998 wasn't warmer than 1934.
So, now they say it doesn't matter because that was just the United States temperatures, and not the global temperatures.
Now they say that even though the United States didn't have a steady warming, globally there was a steady warming.
Like I said, it's hard to reason with people who are always moving the goal posts.
So, now they say it doesn't matter because that was just the United States temperatures, and not the global temperatures.
Now they say that even though the United States didn't have a steady warming, globally there was a steady warming.
Like I said, it's hard to reason with people who are always moving the goal posts.
Show me.
All you are doing is proving that people who adhere to AGW know less about AGW than those who don't adhere to it.
gcthomas
New member
Yup, those non scientists who have got all hot under the collar about the conspiracies they see everywhere have learned more about the topic then those who are content with the scientists. So what?
The report does not suggest that those deniers know anywhere near as much as the consensus scientists, does it? This is a scientific debate, and the amateur opinions of the non scientists is irrelevant to the development of the science.
Tyrathca
New member
Hmmm no. They are definitely smarter than you and there is definitely a consensus among climate scientists.
I do not consider myself or any of us part of the consensus. I don't consider anyone who hasn't been actively involved in academia/research to be part of any consensus worth mentioning.
Assuming you are right - you are not one of those people.
Yeah.... I replied with my phone and foolishly didn't proof read (swypes predictive text was way off...)
I'm going to file you under "idiot"
Is there a consensus of experts you DON'T think you know better than?
I wonder if any of the other warming denialists on this thread also deny that sea levels are rising?
Sea level rises irreversibly every time there is an earthquake.
I guarantee you there are very few who know this or care among the warmest freaks. It doesn't help their agenda.
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
What causes land levels to rise?
I'm still waiting for you to tell me how a wooden ship with a 10 foot draft was able to navigate the Northwest Passage in 1903?
Isostacy. However, it seems you've completely misread my objection to your latest inane distraction.
So are you saying that sea levels are rising because earthquakes are sinking the land, and not at all because of "thermal expansion caused by the warming of the oceans (since water expands as it warms) and the loss of land-based ice (such as glaciers and polar ice caps) due to increased melting"?
As for sea levels rising, they have been rising for thousands of years, what makes you think you can do something to stop it?
Why are sea levels rising?
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
water is getting lighter
First off, you do know that floating ice has no effect on sea levels when it melts? Therefore, all the polar ice in the Arctic could melt, and it wouldn't effect sea levels.
Antarctic ice sheets have been melting since the last ice age thousands of years ago. It has nothing to do with CO2, or because anything man is doing or not doing.
Also, sometimes the sea levels lower for decades. When the ocean warms, there is more evaporation, which causes more rain and snow in the polar regions, which means water is transferred from the ocean to polar caps, glaciers, etc.
Antarctica is land, and has been gaining ice.
Sea levels are measured with satellites, and have only been done since the early 1990's. There is no way to come up with any kind of substantial conclusions in such a short time.
All your theories are based on hypothetical models, not facts.
One of these days you Darwinists are going to learn to respond to what I say rather than guessing at things I have not said. :up:
You have shown no rational response to an extremely simple objection to your latest inane rabbit trail.
You are a troll. :troll: