News
news The final part of Britain’s real-life X Files has been released
news Nostradamus 2018 predictions: World War 3 and disaster BUT survivors could live to 200
news Stunning bright light turned night to day over vast swathe of Russia
news What's sending mysterious repeating fast radio bursts in space?
news 19,000-pound Chinese space station falling "uncontrolled" back to Earth
news Scientists could one day make humans immortal
news How 'wi-fi' connects human brains and explains why people have 'gut feelings'
news Scientists predict 'mini ice age' could hit UK by 2030
news Why Did the New York Times Break a UFO Story?
news NASA reveals it has started planning a 2069 mission to Alpha Centauri
news Unsolved Science Mysteries From 2017


Username:
Password: or Register
 
Thread Rating:
  • 8 Vote(s) - 2 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

AGW forced climate change is not up for debate.
spɹɐʍoɔ snoɯʎuouɐ
Vocem sine nomine audivit!
User ID: 350320
01-03-2018 07:54 AM

Posts: 649



Post: #1
AGW forced climate change is not up for debate.
Advertisement
Quote:Sixteen of the 17 hottest years in NASA’s 137-year record have occurred since 2001. The warmest year on record is 2016, and 2017 is in second place.

[Image: DSftFOlW4AI0EiM.jpg]

As morning temperatures across the U.S. broke records Monday ― residents of Watertown, New York, woke up to minus 31 degrees Fahrenheit and temperatures plunged to minus 19 degrees in Des Moines, Iowa ― many other parts of the world were warmer than usual.

Huge sections of the Arctic were among the areas that saw temperatures well above average, according to the University of Maine’s Climate Reanalyzer, which compares daily temperature anomalies to a baseline of data from between 1979 and 2000.

Temperatures around the globe were nearly one full degree Fahrenheit, or 0.5 degrees Celsius, above average on Monday. The Northern Hemisphere, which is currently experiencing winter, was 1.6 degrees F (0.9 degrees Celsius) warmer than usual. In Antarctica, where a Delaware-sized iceberg broke off last summer, temperatures were 1.4 degrees Fahrenheit (0.8 degrees C) higher than normal. And the Arctic, which is warming about twice as fast as anywhere else on the planet, started 2018 with temperatures 6.8 degrees F (3.4 degrees C) warmer than average.

A peer-reviewed report released last month by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration found that the Arctic is warming faster than at any point in the past 1,500 years, with 2017 its hottest year on record.

Still, President Donald Trump ― who gutted environmental regulations and attacked efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions during his first year in office ― has seized on the cold snap in the northern Midwest and eastern United States in an attempt to refute the existence climate change.

In a tweet on Thursday, the president conflated cold winter weather with climate, and suggested that the nonbinding Paris Agreement ― from which he announced plans to withdraw in June ― would cost the United States trillions of dollars. In reality, the U.S. contributed just $1 billion to the $100 billion Green Climate Fund set up under the Paris climate accord to help poorer countries invest in renewable energy and forgo coal-fired plants.

more:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/entry/n...f99e1cff97

The debate was over many years ago.
Heartflowers

and proved without a shadow of a doubt many times since then.

Hifuck

[Image: ugKHqGP.jpg]
©®℮å†E
Quote this message in a reply
LoP Guest
lop guest
User ID: 404196
01-03-2018 08:01 AM

 



Post: #2
RE: AGW forced climate change is not up for debate.
rigged numbers for NASA press releases...

actual date show 20 consecutive years of zero warming.... and natural "greenhouse gasses" (mainly water) accounts for 99.99% of all Greenhouse Gas

how's that for "debate?"
Quote this message in a reply
LoP Guest
lop guest
User ID: 397275
01-03-2018 08:03 AM

 



Post: #3
teach RE: AGW forced climate change is not up for debate.
No, it is not. It is fake.


Thanks for playing.
Quote this message in a reply
spɹɐʍoɔ snoɯʎuouɐ
Vocem sine nomine audivit!
User ID: 350320
01-03-2018 08:56 AM

Posts: 649



Post: #4
RE: AGW forced climate change is not up for debate.
[Image: DSjVA9xX0AA9l4-.jpg]




Cyclone compositing is used to assess the intensity, track, and an assortment of storm-scale changes due to warming. Unless explicitly stated, all analyses are presented using storm-relative coordinates. Given their similar tracks, the need to rotate storms relative to their travel path is not deemed necessary. Storm-relative analyses allow a focus on the present-to-future changes common among the events and eliminate artificial smoothing due to variations in storm track and propagation speed. Storm-relative composites have previously been used to analyze impacts of climate change on downscaled GCM simulations of autumn extratropical cyclone events in the northwest Atlantic (Jiang and Perrie 2007; Perrie et al. 2010). The storm-relative composites in the current study utilize a grid measuring 1116 km × 1116 km centered on the sea level pressure minimum. This 1116 km × 1116 km grid represents ±15 grid points from the cyclone center. Prior to recording the minimum sea level pressure and its location at each output time, a 20-point Gaussian weighted smoothing function is applied to the sea level pressure field in order to remove any mesoscale lows (due to convection along fronts, etc.) that may generate discontinuities in the track. While the filter also reduces the magnitudes of the pressure minima used to compute the mean, the overall results are not sensitive to this change. Composite analysis begins at simulation hour 18, because this is the first time that a continuous track exists for all present and future cyclones. Because the WRF domain is limited on its northern and eastern peripheries by the lateral boundaries of the NARR domain (Fig. 1) many of the simulated events approach the lateral boundaries before the conclusion of the simulations. To limit possible contamination from the lateral boundaries, composite analysis concludes at hour 63. This issue also dictated the size of the storm-relative grid where 1116 km × 1116 km is the maximum grid size possible without lateral boundary contamination.

e. Potential vorticity

A novel aspect of this study is the use of the PV framework to analyze climate change impacts on storm-scale cyclone dynamics. We compute Ertel PV (EPV) of the form
[Image: jcli-d-14-00418.1-e1.gif]
where is the quasi-horizontal gradient operator on a pressure surface, is the horizontal wind vector, and is the three-dimensional gradient operator in pressure coordinates. Storm-scale analysis of the present-day and future cyclone composites is performed by analyzing the upper-tropospheric PV (UPV), 2-m potential temperature anomaly (), and diabatic PV (DPV) fields. Pressure and wind on the dynamic tropopause (Morgan and Nielsen-Gammon 1998) are computed to assess the UPV field. Boundary potential temperature anomalies have been shown to act as PV anomalies where warm surface potential temperature anomalies have an effect equivalent to a sheet of cyclonic PV (Bretherton 1966). The 2-m potential temperature anomaly is computed here as the deviation from an 84-h time average. Last, the DPV field is calculated as the 900–750-hPa layer average EPV. This use of lower-tropospheric EPV to represent DPV is consistent with previous studies in the synoptic-dynamic literature (e.g., Davis and Emanuel 1991; Reed et al. 1993). An experiment in which the effects of latent heating were withheld also supports the use of 900–750-hPa layer average EPV to represent the DPV field in the vicinity of cyclones (not shown). In addition to computing these PV fields at each output time, they are also time-averaged over three 12-h periods (21–33, 36–48, and 51–63 h). This is done to mitigate noise and highlight the primary changes in each of the PV fields during the early, middle, and late stages of the composite cyclone evolution.

more:
http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/full/10....14-00418.1

[Image: ugKHqGP.jpg]
©®℮å†E
Quote this message in a reply
LoP Guest
lop guest
User ID: 440814
01-03-2018 10:01 AM

 



Post: #5
RE: AGW forced climate change is not up for debate.
You're a glutton for punishment

Lmonkey
Quote this message in a reply
LoP Guest
lop guest
User ID: 441063
01-03-2018 12:06 PM

 



Post: #6
RE: AGW forced climate change is not up for debate.
I wrote of NASA's "rubber ruler" in 2012. NASA changes the temperature "record," going back to 1880, every month. In just one month in 2012, August to September, 60% of NASA's temperature record changed. How did temperature readings in August of 2012 cause 60% of the temperatures from 1880 to 2011 to change? Anthony Watts says NASA is violating the Data Quality Act.

How does one validate a climate model using temperature observations, if those "observations" were themselves adjusted using models? Real science means using the scientific method, which means using physical measurements to test a hypothesis.

The simple explanation is that NASA is reversing that method. It apparently uses the global warming hypothesis to adjust physical measurements. That is not science. It is the opposite of science.



Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/...z537Amrq5O
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook
Quote this message in a reply
LoP Guest
lop guest
User ID: 408339
01-03-2018 12:20 PM

 



Post: #7
RE: AGW forced climate change is not up for debate.
Nothing is up for debate for a knucklehead that thinks he knows everything already, which, in most cases, proves he knoews next to nothing, and can only copy/paste things that other people say. People just like him. Cult of idealists who are dumb enough to link their causes with politicians, and politicians of a particular party in fact, as though those politicians are somehow different than all other politicians throughout history, and those politicians are just the most honest and righteous persons of high integrity, and would never lie to them or be involved in money grubbing schemes.

They feed their sheeple with statstscs that they come up with. They recognize "experts" which have been paid, to create proaganda to back their claims, and ignore those who don't. No, they try to ruin them.

This is a know-nothing thread for know-nothing people.
Quote this message in a reply
Jessica6
freezing...
User ID: 73723
01-03-2018 05:00 PM

Posts: 138



Post: #8
RE: AGW forced climate change is not up for debate.
Then stop all trade NOW between China and the West.

Between their pollution and the pollution crossed by shipping across the Pacific ocean...

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/11/busine...acoal.html

The increase in global-warming gases from China's coal use will probably exceed that for all industrialized countries combined over the next 25 years, surpassing by five times the reduction in such emissions that the Kyoto Protocol seeks.

[By 2006] China uses more coal than the United States, the European Union and Japan combined. And it has increased coal consumption 14 percent in each of the past two years in the broadest industrialization ever. Every week to 10 days, another coal-fired power plant opens somewhere in China that is big enough to serve all the households in Dallas or San Diego.

To make matters worse, India is right behind China in stepping up its construction of coal-fired power plants — and has a population expected to outstrip China's by 2030.
Quote this message in a reply
LoP Guest
lop guest
User ID: 422235
01-03-2018 05:05 PM

 



Post: #9
RE: AGW forced climate change is not up for debate.
Correct, it is not.

The temperature data has been altered.

The sea level rise of 230 feet since year 1 has slowed on the past 100 years, and the past 50 years.

The little ice age was in late 1700's-early 1800's.

1816 the year without a summer.

It is simply political fearmongering for purposes of extortion: THEFT.
Quote this message in a reply
LoP Guest
lop guest
User ID: 441273
01-03-2018 05:09 PM

 



Post: #10
RE: AGW forced climate change is not up for debate.
Climate engineering is faking out the masses. It's not fixing any problems. It's manufacturing them.
Quote this message in a reply
Damrod
Seeker of knowledge
User ID: 439553
01-03-2018 05:13 PM

Posts: 278



Post: #11
RE: AGW forced climate change is not up for debate.
Yo shitstain...

you can repost this garbage till the stars burn out and it does not make it correct.

Snowball earth to temperate forests at the poles long before humans fell out of the trees and started stacking rocks and making fire.

Your retarded need to cling to this NWO/Globalist bullshit proves that you are the enemy of freedom and should be purged accordingly.

"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." Thomas Jefferson

"Liberty means responsibility, which is why most men dread it." George Bernard Shaw

"Republics decline into democracies and democracies degenerate into despotism"...Aristotle
(This post was last modified: 01-03-2018 05:13 PM by Damrod.) Quote this message in a reply
KillTheCarnage
Banned
User ID: 439834
01-03-2018 05:13 PM

Posts: 817



Post: #12
RE: AGW forced climate change is not up for debate.
LoP Guest  Wrote: (01-03-2018 12:20 PM)
Nothing is up for debate for a knucklehead that thinks he knows everything already, which, in most cases, proves he knoews next to nothing, and can only copy/paste things that other people say. People just like him. Cult of idealists who are dumb enough to link their causes with politicians, and politicians of a particular party in fact, as though those politicians are somehow different than all other politicians throughout history, and those politicians are just the most honest and righteous persons of high integrity, and would never lie to them or be involved in money grubbing schemes.

They feed their sheeple with statstscs that they come up with. They recognize "experts" which have been paid, to create proaganda to back their claims, and ignore those who don't. No, they try to ruin them.

This is a know-nothing thread for know-nothing people.

Bump
Quote this message in a reply
KillTheCarnage
Banned
User ID: 439838
01-03-2018 05:14 PM

Posts: 817



Post: #13
RE: AGW forced climate change is not up for debate.
Damrod  Wrote: (01-03-2018 05:13 PM)
Yo shitstain...

you can repost this garbage till the stars burn out and it does not make it correct.

Snowball earth to temperate forests at the poles long before humans fell out of the trees and started stacking rocks and making fire.

Your retarded need to cling to this NWO/Globalist bullshit proves that you are the enemy of freedom and should be purged accordingly.

Another theory I like for climate change is that we are actually living in a two star solar system, and the other star is reaching it's closest point in the duel orbit.

This would account for the fact that the outer planets in our solar system are also heating up.
Quote this message in a reply
CupidStunt
Unqualified Professional
User ID: 440308
01-03-2018 05:25 PM

Posts: 99



Post: #14
RE: AGW forced climate change is not up for debate.
Climate change is not up for debate, because the climate has never been stable. In the billions of years the earth has existed, the climate has always been in flux.

The debate is the precise nature that humans play in the grand scheme things. Are we artificially warming or cooling? Are we accelerating the natural flow or retarding it?

One thing is for certain, aquanet in the 80s is NOT solely responsible for holes in the ozone. It’s funny that hairspray got attacked, but no one wants to discuss private jets.

Did you know that climatologists still don’t know why we have a La Niña/el nino? They know to watch that little bitty island to predict it (also not an exact science), but don’t actually know the mechanism that sets it. Oh, there’s lots of theories, but no one theory that is widely accepted.

Call me crazy, but before we start placing blame for the changes we see, we might want to *actually* understand the way that system works.

[Image: FAQDh0f_d.jpg?maxwidth=640&shape...ity=medium]
Quote this message in a reply
Olds Cool
Used Register
User ID: 409261
01-03-2018 05:31 PM

Posts: 23



Post: #15
RE: AGW forced climate change is not up for debate.
Summer= GLOBAL WARMING!!
Winter= CLIMATE CHANGE!!

Lmao

I used an Occam Razor this morning.
Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement









Contact UsConspiracy Forum. No reg. required! Return to TopReturn to ContentRSS Syndication