Report: No "Global Warming" for 325 Months...

[1DOWN4UP]

Four Studies Find ?No Observable Sea-Level Effect? From Man-Made Global Warming

 

[printcraft]

[video=youtube;ilD6aYvMPZw]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ilD6aYvMPZw[/video]

 

[chipbennett]

My "religion"? Whom is the deity in climate change?

The State.

 

[chipbennett]

They are handing out the statistics on the hole.
According to NASA (years ago) the hole opens and closes seasonally.
I can not find the link as my Google-Fu is weak today.
CFC's are on the way out but only recently in the grand scale of time and things.
Aerosol propellants were not all CFC's. Many were other inert gases as they were easier to use and far less expensive.

In my limited ability's/knowledge I can not offer up any argument based solely on fact. I can however use my personal experiences from conversations with engineers and other very knowledgeable people who have refuted a lot of what is being force fed to the masses.
Follow the money. Follow the huge grants. Look a what is to be lost and gained in all of this madness. Who is saying what and why. That is a serious way to address what we read and believe.

Even the People Who Believe The Data Record Started In 1979 implicitly admit that there is no correlation between the ozone hole and CFCs:

The Ozone Hole

CFCs banned, ozone hole reaches record size:

Ozone Hole Over Antarctica Nears Record-Breaking Size Again

 

[chipbennett]

What are they hiding? Their findings are public, and often peer-reviewed. The "peers" are often chosen to represent a wide-range of opinions, so as to limit bias in reporting. A journal that is presumed to be biased gets marginalized pretty quickly.

Do you actually believe these things to be true? I could write volumes, but for now I'll just proffer one counter-argument: one of your vaunted, peer-reviewed journals allowed Barack Obama to publish an utterly specious, opinion piece under the guise of scientific literature.

 

[chipbennett]

Oh, FFS. This is the last time I state this:

"Pascal's Wager" applies ONLY TO AN INDIVIDUAL, NOT A SOCIETY. If an individual's actions cause harm ONLY to that individual, then PW applies. CLIMATE CHANGE IS A SOCIETAL ISSUE, SO PW DOES NOT APPLY.

Here's Pascal's wager:

the argument that it is in one's own best interest to behave as if God exists, since the possibility of eternal punishment in hell outweighs any advantage of believing otherwise.

Now, let's change the names to protect the innocent:

the argument that it is in one's own best interest to behave as if man-made climate change exists, since the possibility of man-made destruction of the earth outweighs any advantage of believing otherwise.

 

[chipbennett]

See the above post: "failure to state cause" and "lack of authority". Both completely legitimate reasons to reject a FOIA request.

It is public data, collected at a publicly funded university, using federal tax dollars. That's all the legitimacy needed. Mann doesn't own those data; the tax-paying public does.

Why is raw data unpublished? Researchers spend a great deal of time and money to collect that information. If someone wants to challenge the findings, let them collect their own data. Please keep in mind that researchers go into detail about the methodology they use when interpreting the data, and those methods *can* be challenged without access to the original data set.

And here, you almost had me believing that you knew how science actually works. Hint: what you just described isn't it.

There are these things called "simulations", where folks plug imaginary data into someone's methodology to see what comes out. If I plugged two sets of opposing data into Mann's models (also described in the published works), yet I got *very* similar results, it wouldn't be hard to call BS on Mann's models or methods.

Funny you should mention that. It's already been demonstrated that what you just described is exactly what happens. Enter any arbitrary data, and out pops a hockey stick.

 

[JeremiahJohnson]

Then there's this:

Gloria Steinem Keynotes Planned Parenthood Fundraiser: ?Forced Childbirth Is Single Biggest Cause of Global Warming? - Breitbart




):

 

[jamil]

The State.

I always thought it was the earth, but I suppose to the most collectivist minded people, probably it would be a sort of superstitious worship of the state.

 

[chipbennett]

I always thought it was the earth, but I suppose to the most collectivist minded people, probably it would be a sort of superstitious worship of the state.

There are certainly Gaia-worshippers who act as sycophants and useful idiots for the Religion of Climate Change; but the Religion itself is nothing more than worship of the State, underwritten by global socialists. The endgame is socialism: State control over everything.

 

[david890]

Four Studies Find ?No Observable Sea-Level Effect? From Man-Made Global Warming

"Thus, we found that there is (yet) no observable sea-level effect of anthropogenic global warming in the world's best recorded region.”

They haven't discounted sea-level increases; just that the observed rises are within statistical error ranges of their measurements. Basically, if the 20' increase requires 100 years, we won't see much change in 10 years of data.

 

[david890]

No climate change. None whatsover. Zip. Nada.

Hottest Year Ever? 2016 Burns Through Heat Records, NASA Says

 

[printcraft]

No climate change. None whatsover. Zip. Nada.

Hottest Year Ever? 2016 Burns Through Heat Records, NASA Says

Polar Voyage Meant To Prove Global Warming STUCK In Ice | The Daily Caller

 

[rhino]

My bro Chip is far more patient than I.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

My bro Chip is far more patient than I.

So patient that he took a month and a half to contemplate how to answer.

That is patience

 

[rhino]

So patient that he took a month and a half to contemplate how to answer.

That is patience

Hahah!

Not where I was going, but you make a good point. Methinks he's been otherwise occupied for a while.

 

[chipbennett]

No climate change. None whatsover. Zip. Nada.

Hottest Year Ever? 2016 Burns Through Heat Records, NASA Says

Pop quiz: as a percentage of total data, how much of the data are real, and how much are fabricated... er, "estimated"?

To believe that this year is the hottest year on record is to disbelieve in the unmolested historical temperature record. Michael Mann said that the Church of Climate Change needed to hide the decline, and so they have - to the point that they would have you believe that glaciers were melting during the allegedly coldest years on record.

Any real scientist can see right through their fraud.

 

[chipbennett]

So patient that he took a month and a half to contemplate how to answer.

That is patience

My bro Chip is far more patient than I.

Hahah!

Not where I was going, but you make a good point. Methinks he's been otherwise occupied for a while.

...yeah, about two months straight of 70-80 hour work weeks. Very little internetting going on.

 

[rhino]

...yeah, about two months straight of 70-80 hour work weeks. Very little internetting going on.

Glad to see you back, sir!

 

[david890]

Any real scientist can see right through their fraud.

No "real" scientists at NASA?

As for your "pop quiz", any numbers I give would be dismissed outright.