All Solar, Et Al, In 12 Years?

[Randolph Kinney]

The following statement is from that right wing Koch organization NPR (National Public Radio) and comes directly from Dr. Hansen...Yes, that Dr. Hansen cheerleader for GW.

"The three warmest years in the GISS temperature analysis, 2014, 2010, and 2005 in that order, can be considered to be in a statistical tie because of several sources of uncertainty, the largest source being incomplete spatial coverage of the data."​

NPR notes that NOAA 'should be more careful with their public statements, in particular on a topic as politically and economically sensitive as global warming. [and] should read to the bottom of the research and not rely on superficial media statements...'

Nevermind that for the past 10 years, each year has been declared the "hottest" on record, but Hansen now says that only 2005, 2010, 2014 are the "hottest" years. NOAA claims the earth has warmed by 1.4 degrees C. since 1900, and that is not an unusual rise, in fact, it is quite muted when you consider we came out of the mini-Ice Age in 1850, and many centuries may have had changes that were undoubtedly much greater.

^^^ Totally agree.

The fools and idiots are easily misled by the superficial media statements.

 

[Meandering]

Because those are the only messages they are receiving.

 

[Terrel L. Shields]

Martin University's Vision is to be a Haven of Hope, a Community of Support, and a Premier Lender among Institutions of Higher Education."

fixed that for ya...

Tech schools in Texas are training people to work on wind generators... Looks to me like the first skill to learn is to overcome a fear of heights.

 

[Meandering]

The quicker picker,
bird pieces
picker uppers.



. Texas training people to work on wind generators

 

[Randolph Kinney]

Back in August 1988, Dr. James Hansen et. al. published Global climate changes as forecast by Goddard Institute for Space Studies.

http://pubs.giss.nasa.gov/abs/ha02700w.html

Hansen et al, postulated three scenarios,

A: increase in CO2 emissions by 1.5% per year

B: constant increase in CO2 emissions after 2000

C: No increase in CO2 emissions after 2000

Naturally, the mainstream media focused on the temperature projections of scenario A. Some of Hansen's peers knew Scenarios A and B were unrealistic, and now everyone knows how wrong Hansen's hypothesis and conclusions were.

Fritz Koerner did a study about Arctic Island cores. They showed temperature increasing before CO2 concentrations increased. In retrospect, scenario C is more interesting and more telling.

Hansen presents scenario C as the ideal scenario. He is telling political leaders and media what will happen if humans stop adding CO2 to the atmosphere. Salvation! Temperatures will stop increasing. Ironically, this is equivalent to running the computer model as if CO2 was not causing warming. In doing so, it effectively presents the null hypothesis to the AGW hypothesis. It shows what would happen if CO2 was not the cause of warming. It approximates reality.

Hansen limited his research and computer climate models to human causes of climate change. He produced two projections that argued CO2 would continue to increase. In doing so, he predetermined the outcome. He confirmed his hypothesis that continued human production would cause global warming, but only in the computer models. However, apparently driven by his political agenda, he had to convince politicians that a reduction in CO2 output would solve the problem. To do this, he ran his computer model to show what happens with no CO2 increase. It produced a curve that fits the actual temperature trend in the intervening 27 years. This is the result you expect if you accept the null hypothesis that CO2 from any source is not causing global warming.

Yet the IPCC and others have been running their computer models under the same assumptions as Hansen: human emissions is the cause of climate change producing the same forecast as Hansen's computer models. Yet reality dictates that increasing CO2 levels has the effect as if no CO2 was added to the atmosphere. The null hypothesis has been demonstrated by reality.

 

[Pittsburgh Pete]

Three of the warmest years in the last ten? Nah, it's a cyclical thing say the deniers. What do a bunch of scientists know anyway?

 

[Randolph Kinney]

Three of the warmest years in the last ten? Nah, it's a cyclical thing say the deniers. What do a bunch of scientists know anyway?

The better question is , what do you know about anything? Only what the government tells you.

 

[Terrel L. Shields]

The other three were 1911, 1934 and 1936...depending upon who you believe.

 

[Elliott]

In July 1913, Death Valley was in the grips of an extreme heat wave, with temperatures of 125 degrees or higher for more than a week. On July 10, the area entered the history books when the mercury climbed to a blistering 134 degrees Fahrenheit (57 degrees Celsius) at Furnace Creek, California, breaking the record for the highest temperature ever recorded. As a sweltering summer continues, with near-record temperatures across much of the nation, here’s a look back at the hottest day on Earth.


Amazing isn't it earthers! The hottest day ever was 100 years ago! People that were there said they saw birds fall out of the sky. Birds gotta fly.

http://www.history.com/news/the-hottest-day-on-earth-100-years-ago

 

[Randolph Kinney]

Another Pete who knows only what the government tells him