Another big surprise...more made up "Global Warming" data...
Comments
-
How are temps now the same as in the 30s?HoustonHusky said:
Thank you for not getting the point...big surprise. You can't say CO2 causes global warming and have the temps in the 30s the same as the temps today, so you have to "adjust" the historical temps down as they have. And you can't have a pause in global warming over the last 19 years or so when the CO2 levels have gone up as much or more than the previous years when temps did rise, so you have to find ways to adjust the data to force the temps to rise as they apparently did.2001400ex said:
I'm the moron. But you throw out a chart ignoring the last 40 years. Also like 4 posts ago you said recorded history was only "like 30 or 40 years".HoustonHusky said:
WTF are you talking about? The chart doesn't stop at 1960...it stops in the late 1970s. God you are a moron.2001400ex said:
Why does you chart stop in 1960? You see, your chart illustrates exactly what my gif is getting at.HoustonHusky said:Thanks for illustrating my point...these folks put out charts that look official but the data behind them is crap and has been "adjusted" numerous times to fit the narrative they want. The US data is sparce, and global data is pretty much nonexistent going back in history.
As an example, somehow the historical data changed significantly from the 80s to today. Here was the official North American historical chart from the late 70s/early 80s...which included the global heat waves of the 1930s that everyone knows about (dust bowl/etc).
The only way that chart changes that much to the current one is through data "adjustments"...and it's amazing how the adjustments magically fit the narrative they want...
BTW, the dust bowl is weather, not climate. The plains of the United States is not indicative of the world.
And even if you accept your chart...all it says is that we are almost back up to the temps of the 30s. Well, until you change the historical data...
Not to mention that global warming is being linked to CO2 emissions. What do you think happened the last 40 years globally with CO2 emissions?
If you looked at the years around 1998, that'll answer your question. Use your brain. -
After that last one, I'm not gonna get involved in another one of these shit threads on climate change
-
Math is hard for folks with speed limit IQs...God you are slow.2001400ex said:
How are temps now the same as in the 30s?HoustonHusky said:
Thank you for not getting the point...big surprise. You can't say CO2 causes global warming and have the temps in the 30s the same as the temps today, so you have to "adjust" the historical temps down as they have. And you can't have a pause in global warming over the last 19 years or so when the CO2 levels have gone up as much or more than the previous years when temps did rise, so you have to find ways to adjust the data to force the temps to rise as they apparently did.2001400ex said:
I'm the moron. But you throw out a chart ignoring the last 40 years. Also like 4 posts ago you said recorded history was only "like 30 or 40 years".HoustonHusky said:
WTF are you talking about? The chart doesn't stop at 1960...it stops in the late 1970s. God you are a moron.2001400ex said:
Why does you chart stop in 1960? You see, your chart illustrates exactly what my gif is getting at.HoustonHusky said:Thanks for illustrating my point...these folks put out charts that look official but the data behind them is crap and has been "adjusted" numerous times to fit the narrative they want. The US data is sparce, and global data is pretty much nonexistent going back in history.
As an example, somehow the historical data changed significantly from the 80s to today. Here was the official North American historical chart from the late 70s/early 80s...which included the global heat waves of the 1930s that everyone knows about (dust bowl/etc).
The only way that chart changes that much to the current one is through data "adjustments"...and it's amazing how the adjustments magically fit the narrative they want...
BTW, the dust bowl is weather, not climate. The plains of the United States is not indicative of the world.
And even if you accept your chart...all it says is that we are almost back up to the temps of the 30s. Well, until you change the historical data...
Not to mention that global warming is being linked to CO2 emissions. What do you think happened the last 40 years globally with CO2 emissions?
If you looked at the years around 1998, that'll answer your question. Use your brain.
Before temperature history magically changed, the average NA temperature around 1980 was ~0.6 C less than the peak in the late 1930s (hence the Time covers of Global Cooling, etc). Which doesn't fit the CO2 driving global warming theory. And if you believe the chart you showed on temps rising, temps have gone up about 0.6 C since 1980, which would have put them about the same average temperature as the 1930s.
But you can't have that and say Global Warming is directly correlated to CO2 levels since the CO2 levels are much higher now than in 1930. And since people don't want to change the CO2 theory, the historical "data" had to change via "adjustments" to fit the theory.
It's the same reason it's so important for these "scientists" to find ways to eliminate the pause in "Global Warming"...because the pause has happened it contradicts the correlation they want to have between CO2 levels and Global Temps. They don't want to question the correlation to CO2 they believe, so they question and manipulate the data over and over to force it to the answer they want.
I.e...really shitty science. And the sad part about it is that in some cases the raw data itself has been overwritten, which makes it worthless for any and all studies going forward. -
-
HoustonHusky said:
Math is hard for folks with speed limit IQs...God you are slow.2001400ex said:
How are temps now the same as in the 30s?HoustonHusky said:
Thank you for not getting the point...big surprise. You can't say CO2 causes global warming and have the temps in the 30s the same as the temps today, so you have to "adjust" the historical temps down as they have. And you can't have a pause in global warming over the last 19 years or so when the CO2 levels have gone up as much or more than the previous years when temps did rise, so you have to find ways to adjust the data to force the temps to rise as they apparently did.2001400ex said:
I'm the moron. But you throw out a chart ignoring the last 40 years. Also like 4 posts ago you said recorded history was only "like 30 or 40 years".HoustonHusky said:
WTF are you talking about? The chart doesn't stop at 1960...it stops in the late 1970s. God you are a moron.2001400ex said:
Why does you chart stop in 1960? You see, your chart illustrates exactly what my gif is getting at.HoustonHusky said:Thanks for illustrating my point...these folks put out charts that look official but the data behind them is crap and has been "adjusted" numerous times to fit the narrative they want. The US data is sparce, and global data is pretty much nonexistent going back in history.
As an example, somehow the historical data changed significantly from the 80s to today. Here was the official North American historical chart from the late 70s/early 80s...which included the global heat waves of the 1930s that everyone knows about (dust bowl/etc).
The only way that chart changes that much to the current one is through data "adjustments"...and it's amazing how the adjustments magically fit the narrative they want...
BTW, the dust bowl is weather, not climate. The plains of the United States is not indicative of the world.
And even if you accept your chart...all it says is that we are almost back up to the temps of the 30s. Well, until you change the historical data...
Not to mention that global warming is being linked to CO2 emissions. What do you think happened the last 40 years globally with CO2 emissions?
If you looked at the years around 1998, that'll answer your question. Use your brain.
Before temperature history magically changed, the average NA temperature around 1980 was ~0.6 C less than the peak in the late 1930s (hence the Time covers of Global Cooling, etc). Which doesn't fit the CO2 driving global warming theory. And if you believe the chart you showed on temps rising, temps have gone up about 0.6 C since 1980, which would have put them about the same average temperature as the 1930s.
But you can't have that and say Global Warming is directly correlated to CO2 levels since the CO2 levels are much higher now than in 1930. And since people don't want to change the CO2 theory, the historical "data" had to change via "adjustments" to fit the theory.
It's the same reason it's so important for these "scientists" to find ways to eliminate the pause in "Global Warming"...because the pause has happened it contradicts the correlation they want to have between CO2 levels and Global Temps. They don't want to question the correlation to CO2 they believe, so they question and manipulate the data over and over to force it to the answer they want.
I.e...really shitty science. And the sad part about it is that in some cases the raw data itself has been overwritten, which makes it worthless for any and all studies going forward.
LOTS of green in green -
The denial movement is not a movement for truth. It's a movement to preserve the market share of oil and gas, hth.Southerndawg said:HoustonHusky said:
Math is hard for folks with speed limit IQs...God you are slow.2001400ex said:
How are temps now the same as in the 30s?HoustonHusky said:
Thank you for not getting the point...big surprise. You can't say CO2 causes global warming and have the temps in the 30s the same as the temps today, so you have to "adjust" the historical temps down as they have. And you can't have a pause in global warming over the last 19 years or so when the CO2 levels have gone up as much or more than the previous years when temps did rise, so you have to find ways to adjust the data to force the temps to rise as they apparently did.2001400ex said:
I'm the moron. But you throw out a chart ignoring the last 40 years. Also like 4 posts ago you said recorded history was only "like 30 or 40 years".HoustonHusky said:
WTF are you talking about? The chart doesn't stop at 1960...it stops in the late 1970s. God you are a moron.2001400ex said:
Why does you chart stop in 1960? You see, your chart illustrates exactly what my gif is getting at.HoustonHusky said:Thanks for illustrating my point...these folks put out charts that look official but the data behind them is crap and has been "adjusted" numerous times to fit the narrative they want. The US data is sparce, and global data is pretty much nonexistent going back in history.
As an example, somehow the historical data changed significantly from the 80s to today. Here was the official North American historical chart from the late 70s/early 80s...which included the global heat waves of the 1930s that everyone knows about (dust bowl/etc).
The only way that chart changes that much to the current one is through data "adjustments"...and it's amazing how the adjustments magically fit the narrative they want...
BTW, the dust bowl is weather, not climate. The plains of the United States is not indicative of the world.
And even if you accept your chart...all it says is that we are almost back up to the temps of the 30s. Well, until you change the historical data...
Not to mention that global warming is being linked to CO2 emissions. What do you think happened the last 40 years globally with CO2 emissions?
If you looked at the years around 1998, that'll answer your question. Use your brain.
Before temperature history magically changed, the average NA temperature around 1980 was ~0.6 C less than the peak in the late 1930s (hence the Time covers of Global Cooling, etc). Which doesn't fit the CO2 driving global warming theory. And if you believe the chart you showed on temps rising, temps have gone up about 0.6 C since 1980, which would have put them about the same average temperature as the 1930s.
But you can't have that and say Global Warming is directly correlated to CO2 levels since the CO2 levels are much higher now than in 1930. And since people don't want to change the CO2 theory, the historical "data" had to change via "adjustments" to fit the theory.
It's the same reason it's so important for these "scientists" to find ways to eliminate the pause in "Global Warming"...because the pause has happened it contradicts the correlation they want to have between CO2 levels and Global Temps. They don't want to question the correlation to CO2 they believe, so they question and manipulate the data over and over to force it to the answer they want.
I.e...really shitty science. And the sad part about it is that in some cases the raw data itself has been overwritten, which makes it worthless for any and all studies going forward.
LOTS of green in green -
More like the acceptance of realityWilburHooksHands said:
The denial movement is not a movement for truth. It's a movement to preserve the market share of oil and gas, hth.Southerndawg said:HoustonHusky said:
Math is hard for folks with speed limit IQs...God you are slow.2001400ex said:
How are temps now the same as in the 30s?HoustonHusky said:
Thank you for not getting the point...big surprise. You can't say CO2 causes global warming and have the temps in the 30s the same as the temps today, so you have to "adjust" the historical temps down as they have. And you can't have a pause in global warming over the last 19 years or so when the CO2 levels have gone up as much or more than the previous years when temps did rise, so you have to find ways to adjust the data to force the temps to rise as they apparently did.2001400ex said:
I'm the moron. But you throw out a chart ignoring the last 40 years. Also like 4 posts ago you said recorded history was only "like 30 or 40 years".HoustonHusky said:
WTF are you talking about? The chart doesn't stop at 1960...it stops in the late 1970s. God you are a moron.2001400ex said:
Why does you chart stop in 1960? You see, your chart illustrates exactly what my gif is getting at.HoustonHusky said:Thanks for illustrating my point...these folks put out charts that look official but the data behind them is crap and has been "adjusted" numerous times to fit the narrative they want. The US data is sparce, and global data is pretty much nonexistent going back in history.
As an example, somehow the historical data changed significantly from the 80s to today. Here was the official North American historical chart from the late 70s/early 80s...which included the global heat waves of the 1930s that everyone knows about (dust bowl/etc).
The only way that chart changes that much to the current one is through data "adjustments"...and it's amazing how the adjustments magically fit the narrative they want...
BTW, the dust bowl is weather, not climate. The plains of the United States is not indicative of the world.
And even if you accept your chart...all it says is that we are almost back up to the temps of the 30s. Well, until you change the historical data...
Not to mention that global warming is being linked to CO2 emissions. What do you think happened the last 40 years globally with CO2 emissions?
If you looked at the years around 1998, that'll answer your question. Use your brain.
Before temperature history magically changed, the average NA temperature around 1980 was ~0.6 C less than the peak in the late 1930s (hence the Time covers of Global Cooling, etc). Which doesn't fit the CO2 driving global warming theory. And if you believe the chart you showed on temps rising, temps have gone up about 0.6 C since 1980, which would have put them about the same average temperature as the 1930s.
But you can't have that and say Global Warming is directly correlated to CO2 levels since the CO2 levels are much higher now than in 1930. And since people don't want to change the CO2 theory, the historical "data" had to change via "adjustments" to fit the theory.
It's the same reason it's so important for these "scientists" to find ways to eliminate the pause in "Global Warming"...because the pause has happened it contradicts the correlation they want to have between CO2 levels and Global Temps. They don't want to question the correlation to CO2 they believe, so they question and manipulate the data over and over to force it to the answer they want.
I.e...really shitty science. And the sad part about it is that in some cases the raw data itself has been overwritten, which makes it worthless for any and all studies going forward.
LOTS of green in green -
Oil companies and politicians would never have a profit motive.WilburHooksHands said:
The denial movement is not a movement for truth. It's a movement to preserve the market share of oil and gas, hth.Southerndawg said:HoustonHusky said:
Math is hard for folks with speed limit IQs...God you are slow.2001400ex said:
How are temps now the same as in the 30s?HoustonHusky said:
Thank you for not getting the point...big surprise. You can't say CO2 causes global warming and have the temps in the 30s the same as the temps today, so you have to "adjust" the historical temps down as they have. And you can't have a pause in global warming over the last 19 years or so when the CO2 levels have gone up as much or more than the previous years when temps did rise, so you have to find ways to adjust the data to force the temps to rise as they apparently did.2001400ex said:
I'm the moron. But you throw out a chart ignoring the last 40 years. Also like 4 posts ago you said recorded history was only "like 30 or 40 years".HoustonHusky said:
WTF are you talking about? The chart doesn't stop at 1960...it stops in the late 1970s. God you are a moron.2001400ex said:
Why does you chart stop in 1960? You see, your chart illustrates exactly what my gif is getting at.HoustonHusky said:Thanks for illustrating my point...these folks put out charts that look official but the data behind them is crap and has been "adjusted" numerous times to fit the narrative they want. The US data is sparce, and global data is pretty much nonexistent going back in history.
As an example, somehow the historical data changed significantly from the 80s to today. Here was the official North American historical chart from the late 70s/early 80s...which included the global heat waves of the 1930s that everyone knows about (dust bowl/etc).
The only way that chart changes that much to the current one is through data "adjustments"...and it's amazing how the adjustments magically fit the narrative they want...
BTW, the dust bowl is weather, not climate. The plains of the United States is not indicative of the world.
And even if you accept your chart...all it says is that we are almost back up to the temps of the 30s. Well, until you change the historical data...
Not to mention that global warming is being linked to CO2 emissions. What do you think happened the last 40 years globally with CO2 emissions?
If you looked at the years around 1998, that'll answer your question. Use your brain.
Before temperature history magically changed, the average NA temperature around 1980 was ~0.6 C less than the peak in the late 1930s (hence the Time covers of Global Cooling, etc). Which doesn't fit the CO2 driving global warming theory. And if you believe the chart you showed on temps rising, temps have gone up about 0.6 C since 1980, which would have put them about the same average temperature as the 1930s.
But you can't have that and say Global Warming is directly correlated to CO2 levels since the CO2 levels are much higher now than in 1930. And since people don't want to change the CO2 theory, the historical "data" had to change via "adjustments" to fit the theory.
It's the same reason it's so important for these "scientists" to find ways to eliminate the pause in "Global Warming"...because the pause has happened it contradicts the correlation they want to have between CO2 levels and Global Temps. They don't want to question the correlation to CO2 they believe, so they question and manipulate the data over and over to force it to the answer they want.
I.e...really shitty science. And the sad part about it is that in some cases the raw data itself has been overwritten, which makes it worthless for any and all studies going forward.
LOTS of green in green -
What is George Soros' profit motive?
-
Not the genesis of the movement whatsoever. If thats what people are telling themselves, then they are naively serving someone else's agenda.RaceBannon said:
More like the acceptance of realityWilburHooksHands said:
The denial movement is not a movement for truth. It's a movement to preserve the market share of oil and gas, hth.Southerndawg said:HoustonHusky said:
Math is hard for folks with speed limit IQs...God you are slow.2001400ex said:
How are temps now the same as in the 30s?HoustonHusky said:
Thank you for not getting the point...big surprise. You can't say CO2 causes global warming and have the temps in the 30s the same as the temps today, so you have to "adjust" the historical temps down as they have. And you can't have a pause in global warming over the last 19 years or so when the CO2 levels have gone up as much or more than the previous years when temps did rise, so you have to find ways to adjust the data to force the temps to rise as they apparently did.2001400ex said:
I'm the moron. But you throw out a chart ignoring the last 40 years. Also like 4 posts ago you said recorded history was only "like 30 or 40 years".HoustonHusky said:
WTF are you talking about? The chart doesn't stop at 1960...it stops in the late 1970s. God you are a moron.2001400ex said:
Why does you chart stop in 1960? You see, your chart illustrates exactly what my gif is getting at.HoustonHusky said:Thanks for illustrating my point...these folks put out charts that look official but the data behind them is crap and has been "adjusted" numerous times to fit the narrative they want. The US data is sparce, and global data is pretty much nonexistent going back in history.
As an example, somehow the historical data changed significantly from the 80s to today. Here was the official North American historical chart from the late 70s/early 80s...which included the global heat waves of the 1930s that everyone knows about (dust bowl/etc).
The only way that chart changes that much to the current one is through data "adjustments"...and it's amazing how the adjustments magically fit the narrative they want...
BTW, the dust bowl is weather, not climate. The plains of the United States is not indicative of the world.
And even if you accept your chart...all it says is that we are almost back up to the temps of the 30s. Well, until you change the historical data...
Not to mention that global warming is being linked to CO2 emissions. What do you think happened the last 40 years globally with CO2 emissions?
If you looked at the years around 1998, that'll answer your question. Use your brain.
Before temperature history magically changed, the average NA temperature around 1980 was ~0.6 C less than the peak in the late 1930s (hence the Time covers of Global Cooling, etc). Which doesn't fit the CO2 driving global warming theory. And if you believe the chart you showed on temps rising, temps have gone up about 0.6 C since 1980, which would have put them about the same average temperature as the 1930s.
But you can't have that and say Global Warming is directly correlated to CO2 levels since the CO2 levels are much higher now than in 1930. And since people don't want to change the CO2 theory, the historical "data" had to change via "adjustments" to fit the theory.
It's the same reason it's so important for these "scientists" to find ways to eliminate the pause in "Global Warming"...because the pause has happened it contradicts the correlation they want to have between CO2 levels and Global Temps. They don't want to question the correlation to CO2 they believe, so they question and manipulate the data over and over to force it to the answer they want.
I.e...really shitty science. And the sad part about it is that in some cases the raw data itself has been overwritten, which makes it worthless for any and all studies going forward.
LOTS of green in green
