Warm?

[kallend 2,146]

Quote

Quote

Quote

It is the middle of November and there is close to one foot of snow in my yard. Is this abnormal? No not really, it is in fact normal to have snow on the ground for us at this time of year. I don't see any abnormal warming nor do I see any abnormal cooling. It just seems like the beginning of yet another winter which on some days it will be very pleasant outside and on other days it will be down right nasty.

It is the middle of December and Chicago has yet to have any snow at all this season. The current record for the latest "first snowfall of the winter" is Dec 16, and it looks like that is going to be broken this year.

Well there you have if folks, winter starts late in kallend back yard and it is proof of GLOBAL WARMING, brought on by Hutch's SUV.

FAIL, I said no such thing. Just responded to a prior post.

Have you ever tried reading with intent to comprehend?

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kallend 2,146]

Quote

Quote

It is the middle of December and Chicago has yet to have any snow at all this season. The current record for the latest "first snowfall of the winter" is Dec 16, and it looks like that is going to be broken this year.

"Apparently you don't know the difference between a trend and an outlying data point."

http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=3749895#3749895

Let's practice what we preach here...

FAIL on your part too. Do try reading what is written dear boy.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

the top ten hottest years ever have happened in the past 15 years.

I reiterate an issue - the data that shows it is almost always adjusted. And I find adjusted data to be subject to bias.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[kallend 2,146]

Quote

Quote

the top ten hottest years ever have happened in the past 15 years.

I reiterate an issue - the data that shows it is almost always adjusted. And I find adjusted data to be subject to bias.

So you don't believe in the Top Quark, the Higgs Boson, or the pictures coming from the Curiosity Rover (all those data have been adjusted).

And what of epidemiological data on drug efficacy, ALL of which has to be adjusted for confounding variables?

Sometimes your lack of a science education trips you up, counselor.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[brenthutch 444]

Quote

Quote

Quote

the top ten hottest years ever have happened in the past 15 years.

I reiterate an issue - the data that shows it is almost always adjusted. And I find adjusted data to be subject to bias.

So you don't believe in the Top Quark, the Higgs Boson, or the pictures coming from the Curiosity Rover (all those data have been adjusted).

And what of epidemiological data on drug efficacy, ALL of which has to be adjusted for confounding variables?

Sometimes your lack of a science education trips you up, counselor.

Take a deep breath professor, I knowi it is a hard
pill to swallow when the IPCC, the "gold standard" of "peer reviewed" science debunks your religion. Even after the data has been "adjusted" "corrected" and has "value added", it still tells the same story. Science, my friend, is a harsh mistress.

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

So you don't believe in the Top Quark, the Higgs Boson, or the pictures coming from the Curiosity Rover (all those data have been adjusted).

Actually, I believe in all of those things.

Quote

And what of epidemiological data on drug efficacy, ALL of which has to be adjusted for confounding variables?

I believe in those, as well. But as we all know, one person's wonder drug is another person's cause of death when used as directed.

But here's the thing, John. "Our adjusted data says that it's unlikely that amiodarone will kill a user." Raw data may say, "cause of death: ARDS due to amiodarone toxicity."

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[OHCHUTE 0]

While alot of you are worried about above ground effects, I'm particularly concerned with what is happening underground. With all the earth quakes happening along the fault line, land might end up back where it once was. God forbid Philadelphia will end up in Gabon.

[brenthutch 444]

Good God man you are right, If we keep driving big cars Guam might capsize.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zNZczIgVXjg

[OHCHUTE 0]

Quote

Good God man you are right, If we keep driving big cars Guam might capsize.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zNZczIgVXjg

Worse. Gabon/ Georgia is already here. Now that is cause for concern.

[kallend 2,146]

Quote

Quote

So you don't believe in the Top Quark, the Higgs Boson, or the pictures coming from the Curiosity Rover (all those data have been adjusted).

Actually, I believe in all of those things.

Quote

And what of epidemiological data on drug efficacy, ALL of which has to be adjusted for confounding variables?

I believe in those, as well. But as we all know, one person's wonder drug is another person's cause of death when used as directed.

But here's the thing, John. "Our adjusted data says that it's unlikely that amiodarone will kill a user." Raw data may say, "cause of death: ARDS due to amiodarone toxicity."

Sometimes your lack of a science education trips you up, counselor.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kallend 2,146]

For all those who think local = global:

By Dr. Jeff Masters
Published: 4:23 PM GMT on December 11, 2012
It's been a bad year for building snowmen in Chicago. It last snowed in Chicago on March 4, 2012, and Chicago has now gone 281 days in a row without snow, its longest such streak on record. Weather records for Chicago date back to 1871. Dallas, Texas had its first snow of the season yesterday, picking up 0.1". This is only the second time on record that Dallas has had an earlier first snow than Chicago. The only other time this has happened was in 1951, when Dallas received 0.6" on November 2, and Chicago had 4.4" on November 3.

With accumulating snow looking highly unlikely through at least December 14, Chicago's record for latest accumulating snow of the season may also fall. The average date for Chicago's first measurable snowfall is November 16, and the latest first snow of the season on record occurred on December 16, 1965. Rain mixed with snow is expected this weekend on the 15th and 16th, but the precipitation may fall entirely as rain. The lack of snow in Chicago this year is reflective of both how warm and dry it's been. The 25.20" of rain Chicago has received so far in 2012 is more than 10" below average, and the city experienced its 10th driest January - November period on record. Record warmth in early December brought Chicago only its 3rd 70°F December day on December 3.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[brenthutch 444]

So in other words, nothing that hasn't happened before. Nothing unprecedented. Yawn, moving on.

[kallend 2,146]

Quote

So in other words, nothing that hasn't happened before. Moving on.

skepticalscience.com/ipcc-draft-leak-global-warming-not-solar.html

www.desmogblog.com/2012/12/13/major-ipcc-report-draft-leaked-then-cherry-picked-climate-sceptics

Pinning your hopes on Mr. Rawls (who also believes that a memorial mosque to terrorists is being built in PA) suggests that you are becoming desperate.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[brenthutch 444]

Quote

Quote

So in other words, nothing that hasn't happened before. Moving on.

skepticalscience.com/ipcc-draft-leak-global-warming-not-solar.html

www.desmogblog.com/2012/12/13/major-ipcc-report-draft-leaked-then-cherry-picked-climate-sceptics

Pinning your hopes on Mr. Rawls (who also believes that a memorial mosque to terrorists is being built in PA) suggests that you are becoming desperate.

I am not hoping about anything. I merely pointed out that the latest information out of the IPCC, that "gold standard of peer reviewed science" (your words), has done an “almost complete reversal from AR4 on trends in drought, hurricanes and floods”

[brenthutch 444]

Quote

For all those who think local = global:

By Dr. Jeff Masters
Published: 4:23 PM GMT on December 11, 2012
It's been a bad year for building snowmen in Chicago. It last snowed in Chicago on March 4, 2012, and Chicago has now gone 281 days in a row without snow, its longest such streak on record. Weather records for Chicago date back to 1871. Dallas, Texas had its first snow of the season yesterday, picking up 0.1". This is only the second time on record that Dallas has had an earlier first snow than Chicago. The only other time this has happened was in 1951, when Dallas received 0.6" on November 2, and Chicago had 4.4" on November 3.

With accumulating snow looking highly unlikely through at least December 14, Chicago's record for latest accumulating snow of the season may also fall. The average date for Chicago's first measurable snowfall is November 16, and the latest first snow of the season on record occurred on December 16, 1965. Rain mixed with snow is expected this weekend on the 15th and 16th, but the precipitation may fall entirely as rain. The lack of snow in Chicago this year is reflective of both how warm and dry it's been. The 25.20" of rain Chicago has received so far in 2012 is more than 10" below average, and the city experienced its 10th driest January - November period on record. Record warmth in early December brought Chicago only its 3rd 70°F December day on December 3.

http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2012/12/15/more-global-warming-devastation-in-arizona/

Looks like Arizona has your snow.

[kallend 2,146]

Quote

Quote

For all those who think local = global:

By Dr. Jeff Masters
Published: 4:23 PM GMT on December 11, 2012
It's been a bad year for building snowmen in Chicago. It last snowed in Chicago on March 4, 2012, and Chicago has now gone 281 days in a row without snow, its longest such streak on record. Weather records for Chicago date back to 1871. Dallas, Texas had its first snow of the season yesterday, picking up 0.1". This is only the second time on record that Dallas has had an earlier first snow than Chicago. The only other time this has happened was in 1951, when Dallas received 0.6" on November 2, and Chicago had 4.4" on November 3.

With accumulating snow looking highly unlikely through at least December 14, Chicago's record for latest accumulating snow of the season may also fall. The average date for Chicago's first measurable snowfall is November 16, and the latest first snow of the season on record occurred on December 16, 1965. Rain mixed with snow is expected this weekend on the 15th and 16th, but the precipitation may fall entirely as rain. The lack of snow in Chicago this year is reflective of both how warm and dry it's been. The 25.20" of rain Chicago has received so far in 2012 is more than 10" below average, and the city experienced its 10th driest January - November period on record. Record warmth in early December brought Chicago only its 3rd 70°F December day on December 3.

http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2012/12/15/more-global-warming-devastation-in-arizona/

Looks like Arizona has your snow.

Better them than us. They're welcome to it. But to make your point more forcibly, global warming does indeed lead to unexpected changes in weather patterns.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[rhaig 0]

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/12/14/worldwide-reactions-to-the-ipcc-ar5-leak/

interesting info out of the IPCC

Quote

The admission of strong evidence for enhanced solar forcing changes everything. The climate alarmists can’t continue to claim that warming was almost entirely due to human activity over a period when solar warming effects, now acknowledged to be important, were at a maximum. The final draft of AR5 WG1 is not scheduled to be released for another year but the public needs to know now how the main premises and conclusions of the IPCC story line have been undercut by the IPCC itself.

--
Rob

[kallend 2,146]

Quote

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/12/14/worldwide-reactions-to-the-ipcc-ar5-leak/

interesting info out of the IPCC

Quote

The admission of strong evidence for enhanced solar forcing changes everything. The climate alarmists can’t continue to claim that warming was almost entirely due to human activity over a period when solar warming effects, now acknowledged to be important, were at a maximum. The final draft of AR5 WG1 is not scheduled to be released for another year but the public needs to know now how the main premises and conclusions of the IPCC story line have been undercut by the IPCC itself.

Already debunked.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

Already debunked.

Where and by whom?

[kallend 2,146]

#213

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[brenthutch 444]

Quote

#213

By a warmist website, it would be akin to quoting fox news.

As I see it there are two big stories, the first is that there are reasons for warming, other than co2, the second and perhaps most notable is that warmer global temperatures have been found to be more salubrious than deleterious. I think we can all agree that that is a good thing, regardless of your position on AGW.

[billvon 3,108]

>the second and perhaps most notable is that warmer global temperatures have been
>found to be more salubrious than deleterious.

Cool, you have switched to a Type III denier! Is this serious, or will you switch back to a type I or II the next time you read something on FOX news?

[brenthutch 444]

Quote

>the second and perhaps most notable is that warmer global temperatures have been
>found to be more salubrious than deleterious.

Cool, you have switched to a Type III denier! Is this serious, or will you switch back to a type I or II the nepxt time you read something on FOX news?

Please Bill, do you have something worthwhile to contribute? Maybe you can explaine why a quarter of abillion dollars fulshed down the tank on A123 is a good thing, or debunking those "deniers" on the IPCC. Come on man, impress me. Lord knows it is well beond kallend's paygrade to do so.

[billvon 3,108]

> Maybe you can explaine why a quarter of abillion dollars fulshed down the tank on
>A123 is a good thing . . .

The money overall was a good thing because we now have good lithium ion batteries that run everything from our cars to our power tools to our laptops to our cellphones.

Do you use a cellphone? Any cordless power tools? If so you are one of the many who benefit from such investments; you should be glad that the industry succeeded even if there are individual failures (as there always are.)

But if you have "turned a new leaf" so to speak and are now a type III I think that's a good thing. That has some scientific basis. Type III's accept that the planet is warmer, and that we are responsible for most of the warming - but it must be a good thing. That it MIGHT be a good thing is not an unreasonable position, provided you are willing to take the risk - and live with the consequences (and take the responsibility) if you are wrong.

Thus a type III is, IMO, pretty close to not being a denier at all - they just have an unsubstantiated faith that ALL warming must be good, rather than just some of it (which is indeed supportable.)

Unfortunately a lot of deniers have absolutely no scientific basis for any of their beliefs. They just deny. And anything that supports them they support; anything that does not support them they deny. If a report comes out that says the planet isn't warmer they post that and claim that all the alarmists/warmists are lying. If a report comes out that says the planet is warming but it's not due to anthropogenic gases, they change their stance without so much as the pretense of intellectual integrity and claim that yes, the planet is warmer, but it's not our fault, it's natural - and all the alarmists/warmists are lying. They don't even see any inconsistency in their positions, because they see this as a political war with nothing to do with science.

Fortunately there are fewer and fewer of those types.

=====================================
Climate poll: Science doubters say world is warming
Sun, 12/16/2012 - 11:28pm
Seth Borenstein, AP Science Writer

WASHINGTON (AP)—A growing majority of Americans think global warming is occurring, that it will become a serious problem and that the U.S. government should do something about it, a new Associated Press-GfK poll finds.

Even most people who say they don't trust scientists on the environment say temperatures are rising.

The poll found 4 out of every 5 Americans said climate change will be a serious problem for the United States if nothing is done about it. That's up from 73% when the same question was asked in 2009.

And 57% of Americans say the U.S. government should do a great deal or quite a bit about the problem. That's up from 52% in 2009. Only 22% of those surveyed think little or nothing should be done, a figure that dropped from 25%.

Overall, 78% of those surveyed said they believe temperatures are rising, up from 75% three years earlier. In general, U.S. belief in global warming, according to AP-GfK and other polls, has fluctuated over the years but has stayed between about 70 and 85%.

The biggest change in the polling is among people who trust scientists only a little or not at all. About 1 in 3 of the people surveyed fell into that category.
=======================================

[brenthutch 444]

Quote

> Maybe you can explaine why a quarter of abillion dollars fulshed down the tank on
>A123 is a good thing . . .

The money overall was a good thing because we now have good lithium ion batteries that run everything from our cars to our power tools to our laptops to our cellphones.

And 57% of Americans say the U.S. government should do a great deal or quite a bit about the problem.
=======================================

So Bill thinks we didn't have lithium ion batteries before Obama's spending spree

With regard to your poll, most Americans believe in ghosts which, by the way, are no less real that AGW.

http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-500160_162-994766.html