ginjawarrior
Well-Known Member
so you got nothing then?i sense a certai..yawn
so you got nothing then?i sense a certai..yawn
what? no, you got nothing. Remember? You are re-gurging. I'm the OP. I'm proved many links of the peer review. Cloud research is not showing it. It's all here. My position is only un-clear to the trolls that are the low amobeas
Well a couple things, I'm always will to discuss rationally.
40 year data set is a eye blink in Climate Science.
The extrapolation line in Red is false.
The Blue lines show a distinct slowing of the rate.
A true extrapolation will show that Red line producing a distinct flattening out (inconvenient)
I no more trust skeptical science blogs than I trust NASA on this. It is obvious to me this is a cover-up.
The graph you provide is worthless and only proves one thing. The foregone conclusion. The smug to glug.
Why do you care if I don't fall for it? Because it is political agenda. And the nature of agenda is right-fight.
Another 30 year, and not contiguous data, thus another sparse set.
Please read what the Berkley report has to say about these worthless data sets.
link for the chart what paper did it come from??View attachment 2375170
Closed loop feedback with Cloud Effect on Surface Temps. 100 years. The Royal Navy goes back another 300 years and shows the same flat temp over time. Pure mitigation of surface temp by the extra albedo produced when temps rise.
Sure the Berkeley Report seems supportive if you don't read past wikipedia and the popular sources. Mostly, however, the BEST study does not support AGW.
BEST results found one-third of climate stations report a cooling, not a warming.
BEST concluded that land temperatures may be driven by the North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO) - a decadal phenomenon.
Based on this most recent temperature and CO2 information...
" We can safely assume that the BEST researchers are no dummies.....that would explain their hedging comments that the human influence is 'overestimated' and that natural decadal oscillations may be driving temperatures instead of human CO2 emissions."
Here's what the leader said, "
BEST founder Richard A. Muller told The Guardian "...we are bringing the spirit of science back to a subject that has become too argumentative and too contentious," "...we are an independent, non-political, non-partisan group. We will gather the data, do the analysis, present the results and make all of it available. There will be no spin, whatever we find. We are doing this because it is the most important project in the world today. Nothing else comes close."[3]
The BEST project is funded by unrestricted educational grants totalling (as of March 2011) about $635,000. Large donors include Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, the Charles G. Koch Foundation, the Fund for Innovative Climate and Energy Research (FICER)[4], and the William K. Bowes, Jr. Foundation.[5] The donors have no control over how BEST conducts the research or what they publish.[6]
It actually was un-biased but that that didn't stop the power mongers from spinning it for their purpose.
See the current wikipedia for BEST and ask yourself. Does it mention this? No.
- BEST results show little, if any, warming over recent years
- BEST results found one-third of climate stations report a cooling, not a warming
- BEST determined that government maintained temperature-station quality is "awful"
- BEST found that the urban impact on global land temperatures is minimal
- BEST concluded that the human influence on land temperatures may be overestimated
- BEST concluded that land temperatures may be driven by the North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO) - a decadal phenomenon
- BEST results show little, if any, warming over recent years
dont you keep harping on over small data sets? the overall trend not small subsets is whats important- BEST results found one-third of climate stations report a cooling, not a warming last time i checked 1/3 still leaves 2/3's unaccounted for and guess what the increase there is enough to overwhelm the 1/3 cooling
- BEST determined that government maintained temperature-station quality is "awful" good thing theres multiple sets and sattelites to check against and guess what they all point the same way
- BEST found that the urban impact on global land temperatures is minimal woo hoo yet another string taken from the "deniers" bow
- BEST concluded that the human influence on land temperatures may be overestimated links broken funny how their published papers agree with AGW
- BEST concluded that land temperatures may be driven by the North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO) - a decadal phenomenon links broken again
If you could show anything but animosity it could be an interesting discussion
If you could show anything but animosity it could be an interesting discussion
so you have nothing of substance and cry like a baby when asked for evidenceOK
Showing Only Animosity
How about that? Though I must say if these punk and hiding debate styles were dropped for some pure non personal animus, enemy that would be an improvement
Dismissivness is an indicator of no ideas or articulation motivation, either
Just ego
you don't have a job here, your mommy does about your low self esteem and trollishness
lets take this one step at a time cause your obviously getting cranky at the "hard stuff"