|
|||||
|
|
|
|         
|
|
|||||
I gave you the NASA global mean of earth temperature as processed and visualized by the NOAA from climate dot gov, which hasn't gone up. Do I care about some opinion on blog site?
Here's the data they suppressed in climategate I (there are 3) Show me the "warming". Notice it was warmer twice before? So much for the "unprecedented" angle they've been barking since 1985. It has been nonsense from the get go and still is but slowly the uneducated public has been coerced into thinking it's true. Now that their hypothesis has blown apart and diverged with 75% error over 35 years of refinement, it' over and even the die hard Gaia theory guy admits it's not arming and he was being alarmist. Of course as he points out he's not paid to say it's warming.
http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/v2/n12/carousel/nclimate1589-f2.jpg
We made great gains against pollution in the 60s and 70s then a funny thing happened. Companies who pollute who we would no longer give money to were suddenly "fighting climate change" and we're happy to pay them again. Nothing has changed except the spin put on their activities. Provably, public discourse on pollution (a real problem you can see and has a pile of bodies associated with it) declined while "global warming" (which has never killed anyone while Co2 has in fact "increased our plant yield by 15% " - Dyson) took over the media. Ever ask yourself who's paying for that coverage? Hint: not scientists. http://rs79.vrx.net/opinions/ideas/climate/.images/pollution-ngram.png
The carbon tax, when tried in Europe made CO2 go up. That's ok, plants eat it and make more and bigger plants that eat more Co2 but pollution is a function of Co2, nothing emits Co2 by itself, so if Co2 went up so did pollution. So in the name of green we're pollution more with a carbon tax. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pA6FSy6EKrM
The nuke and coal industry are fighting for the 2 power plans a week China builds, abiot $30B each time. The Nuke industry has spent nearly a trillion dollars promoting global warming to discourage the use of coal. The designer of these reactors has gone on record as saying they're unsafe and should never be used as the scaled up earthbound version of the sub reactor he designed. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-FDrA7yUdFc (14:37)
The graphic is probably true. But meaningless. If you dig up 10X as many cold records hot, it changed the message but is equally meaningless. This is why we have a global yearly mean.* You can't look at only peaks and get any meaningful data about what's going on. It's like using only a tweeter to listen to beethoven's ninth.
The Democratic People Republic Of North Korea isn't democratic because the word is in the name, and anything that hasn to call itself a science, isn't: Creation science, climate science, computer science. Real science produces natural laws, when one of the social sciences coughs one up, they're actually a science and the "climatologists" will continue to have no credibility as long as they ignore things like math, astrophysics and biology which ad long been the complaint - they don't understand real science. Dyson points this out better than anyone.
*This is also fairly meaningless, Dyson spells out out here. tl;dr still not warming. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k69HUuyI5Mk
Of course you don't have time to look at this, that's why you're ok with the idea it's warming. Remember the Gossamer Albatross? That guy has time now, his deconstruction of the math is pretty eloquent and consistent with Dyson, CERN, et al. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oxFm1TXshZY
|
|