September 2013 Open Thread

The thread, there is more.

Comments

  1. #1 Berendaneke
    September 16, 2013

    Jeff Harvey

    NO, NO, NO

    You just don’t understand what I said: mastering life for humans is not sooo difficult to understand: take your personal example if you have a son or daughter: survival of your kids depends on the avaiability of food, healthcare, cloths, a home, caring parents, a long story of successes of civilization, and have nothing to do with your eco insania, obsession with x bacteria and all other stuff you are so fccused on.

    You fight for polar bears, frogs, bacteria, BUT NOT FOR HUMANS, YOU CONSIDER HUMANS AS EVIL, SUPERFLUOUS, HOSTIE, DANGEROUS FOR YOUR BELOVED BACTERIA, YOU WANT TO REDUCE THE NUMBER OF HUMANS (by which method????).

    I LOVE MORE THE HUMANS THAN BACTERIA OR POLAR BEARS. YOUR PREOCCUPATION WITH EVERYTHING BUT MAN IS WHAT I CALL DECADENCE, AS YOU FORGET WHAT COMES FIRST IN LIFE:

    YOUR PERSONAL SURVIVAL, WHICH OBVIOUSLY DOES NOT INTERESET THE ECO ACTIVISTS SO MUCH, OR THE SURVIVAL OF OTHER HUMANS

    YOUR BASIC POSITION IS AGAINST MANKIND ON EARTH AND THAT’s THE REASON WHY I AM SO ANGRY WITH YOU!!!!!

  2. #2 chek
    September 16, 2013

    Note Lionels l;ink Gordon and you similar fuckwit hangers-on.

    No Minoan, Egyptian, Roman, Medieval or Uncle Tom Cobbley warming period matches the present.. That’s my data, now where are yours for your fantasy denial periods?

  3. #3 Luke
    September 16, 2013

    “I have also never encountered such a mentally deranged and diseased group of quacks in my life as the recent bunch that has entered Deltoid. If this is a cross section of the ‘intelligentsia’ on the ‘other side’ then God help humanity.”

    Well said Jeff – quality abuse. I rank it highly. “mentally deranged and diseased: – isn’t that our style of slag off? But anyway – well done.

  4. #4 Luke
    September 16, 2013
  5. #5 Berendaneke
    September 16, 2013

    Jeff, it never comes to your mind that maybe YOU are the idiot and not others?

    This doesn’t even qualify as a bottom-feeding perspective. It is so utterly and brazenly stupid that I don’t want to waste my busy time as a scientist addressing it. Most five year old kids have a better understanding of environmental science than this.

    One thing I will do. I intend to copy-paste this for one of my next scientific lectures. I can’t wait to see how the scientific audience responds. Will there be riotous laughter or will jaws fall to the ground? That’s how pig-ignorant it is. I might as well debate an amoeba.

    Can you – maybe only a little bit – imagine how utterly incivil and utterly arrogant your text is??? No you can’t, that’s your BIG blind spot.

    Of course will your students laugh (it’s easy to anticipate) as people like you attract similarly idiotic other persons. Laughter from your fellow idiots is no proof that you are right and dispose of the truth.

  6. #6 chek
    September 16, 2013

    Looks like The Mad Lukes, not understanding the hierarchy of Life On Earth are angry at their own utter incomprehension and complaining about the unfairness after having invested in a lifetime of shit ideas.

    Perhaps that incomprehension will find some rest in becoming educated.
    Or putting a .38 in it’s mouth.
    I don’t suppose anybody much gives a fuck either way.

  7. #7 BBD
    September 16, 2013

    #6

    The incompetent and clueless tosser can’t even rebaseline a couple of temperature time-series for comparison. Rotten from bark to core. Out with the chainsaws.

    #4

    Gordy seems to have gone, Luke. And even if he comes back you will only confuse him. He even makes you look knowledgeable. Berewanker’s getting lonely now nobody here will talk to him – why not give him a hard time for a bit?

  8. #8 BBD
    September 16, 2013

    Re: your crap on the previous page – you strike me as the sort of lazy trolling prat who can’t be bothered to read the thread, so here’s what you may have missed:

    RSS isn’t “phase shifted” relative to HadCRUT4. That is flat-out wrong and demonstrates that you can’t even read a simple graph. Nor is the difference between the two data-sets anything like as great as your borked graph appears to show. The two data-sets use different baselines – that’s why they plot differently on the y axis.

    Try doing it properly. Rebaseline everything to a *common* baseline, eg 1981 – 2010, used here.

    You really haven’t got a clue, have you?

    I repeat – you fool nobody with your lies and bluster. Your fundamental incompetence and lack of topic knowledge is very obvious. So why not fuck off? You aren’t achieving anything here except making yourself look worse. What’s the point? We all know you are a chippy inadequate and we all know about the fantasy friends, imaginary library and fake credentials.

    We get the picture very clearly, Luke. Your work here is done.

  9. #9 Luke
    September 16, 2013

    Yes yes BBD we know about different baselines – but they still don’t line up do they – the point ! Good to see you’re awake – it’s a wonder at this hour and with your sleep disorder.

    BTW cunt – where’s your real climate non-palaeo library? still waiting.

    AND cunt – answer my 10 questions – still waiting

    And have you played with you son or checked he’s alive yet? Daddy why do you spend your life on the computer wasting your time. Why does Mummy think you’re a fucking idiot and why doesn’t she live here anymore?

    BTW Gordy is taking a dump.

  10. #10 bill
    September 16, 2013

    Sub-literate coprolailic inadequate still waffling on, I see.

    And, lookee – another Hockey Stick! Losers lose again…

  11. #11 Nick
    September 17, 2013

    #9, that was moronic
    #10, the place is groaning with paleo and cryosphere evidence; it takes stunning amounts of feigned ignorance and insanity [or coal money] to ignore it…stupid mugging with profanity, tortured language and emoticons in the blogosphere, and dull evasion from the pollies

  12. #12 Robert Murphy
    September 17, 2013

    I keep coming back here and hoping that Tim Lambert is going to return and moderate this site, but instead I come back to people calling people cunts. This used to be an interesting website, but now it’s a cesspool. It’s a shame because it used to be a must-read site. *Sigh*.

  13. #13 Lotharsson
    September 17, 2013

    Thus far, the level of ‘rebuttal’ – if one can call it that, amongst the idiots here has been not to cite a single example where I am wrong. All I get is a constant stream of accusations of being i league with the green devil, of producing propaganda and the like.

    Fortunately Stu 2 is on hand to call out that fallacy, right? ;-)

  14. #14 Lotharsson
    September 17, 2013

    RSS isn’t “phase shifted” relative to HadCRUT4.

    I get the impression Luke has heard the term and repeated it without knowing what it means. So let’s see if we can find out. What’s the frequency, Luke?

    …but they still don’t line up do they…

    They do line up quite well, and the trends are in reasonably good agreement. You’re asserting that they “should” line up better for the purpose to which BBD’s observation was put – noting that it’s kinda hard to argue that the warming in the surface record has been faked when the satellite record warming is of similar magnitude? That’s eminently silly – insisting that noise “line up” when comparing noisy signals – but par for the course with you.

  15. #15 Berendaneke
    September 17, 2013

    @Robert Murphy

    I tend to agree. Unfortunately there are a few participants here who constantly throw dirt through the air at their opponents. Especially BBD, chek, Lionel, rwhombat and Stu are bad in this respect and should be admonished to improve their manners.

  16. #16 Berendaneke
    September 17, 2013

    Lotharsson

    I have never ever seen BBD making own “observations”. He always ruminates what others have written. Your wording and logic therefore have failed.

    :evil:

  17. #17 Jeff Harvey
    September 17, 2013

    @15

    The hypocrisy is deep with this one…. again, truly psychopathic…

  18. #18 Karen
    September 17, 2013

    So much for Antarctica boiling in hot water.
    http://s17.postimg.org/wb91x69b3/Antarctic_SIE_NSIDC_Sept15_2013.png

  19. #19 Jeff Harvey
    September 17, 2013

    “You fight for polar bears, frogs, bacteria, BUT NOT FOR HUMANS”

    Honestly, how I am supposed to debate this utter drivel? The entire comment @1 is incomprehensible gibberish. Again, its below comic-book level. The writer clearly is clearly deranged. My suggestion is that he reads “The Hungry Green Caterpillar” and work up from there.

  20. #20 Nick
    September 17, 2013

    #18…yes The ‘boiling in hot water meme’ is dead…er, who proposed it, anyway? You chumps with your underwater volcano army, in the complete absence of evidence….

  21. #21 Karen
    September 17, 2013

    er, who proposed it, anyway?

    BBD

  22. #22 Jeff Harvey
    September 17, 2013

    Luke, it doesn’t matter what bloody terms you wish to call them, these’ resources’ you refer to sustain humanity. And these resources are more appropriately called plants and animals or ‘biodiversity’. And they sustain humanity by generating conditions through innumerable interactions that regulate the functioning of ecosystems. Get my drift. you arrogant moron?

    These resources wouldn’t be worth conserving if we didn’t know how they work. That’s what scientists do: study the individuals and populations and how they interact to generate the conditions that regulate ecosystem functions and help to sustain human civilization. Only then does application – resource management and conservation – enter into it.

    So call it whatever the hell you like, but natural systems permit human existence. And the ‘resources’ you refer to are in truth, biodiversity, and the conservation refers to protecting it to ensure that it continues to generate conditions – OR ECOSYSTEM SERVICES – that underpin our economies.

    End of story. That was easy. Any more bullshit from you, Luke?

  23. #23 Karen
    September 17, 2013

    Harvey, could you please stop spamming the thread with off topic rubbish!

    eg. ECOSYSTEM SERVICES

  24. #24 Nick
    September 17, 2013

    #18 that chart does show the proportion involved in the over-celebrated increasing trend in Antarctic sea ice extent is miniscule. Between least extent and greatest extent is not even 10% of mean summer-winter freeze-up. Consistent with the asymmetric zonal temp means predicted and observed.

  25. #25 Karen
    September 17, 2013

    New paper finds the oceans are a net source of CO2 to the atmosphere
    A new paper published in Global Biogeochemical Cycles proposes large revisions to the ocean carbon cycle based upon observations and models, finding the global oceans act as a net source of CO2 to the atmosphere.

    According to the authors, the flow ["flux"] of carbon from deep ocean layers ["obduction"] to the middle layer ["ML"] is 3-5 times greater than assumed previously and by the IPCC. The authors find middle-layer carbon flux toward the ocean surface exceeds flux to the ocean depths ["subduction"] by 11 Petagrams of carbon per year, which by comparison is significantly more carbon than generated by all man-made activities [8.8 Petagrams of carbon per year].

    In other words, the deep oceans naturally contribute more carbon to the middle ocean layers [between 25-150 meters deep] than produced by all of man’s activities combined.

    At the ocean surface, the authors find the oceans contribute 2.4 Petagrams of carbon per year to the atmosphere ["efflux"] and absorb 1.9 Petagrams of carbon per year from the atmosphere ["influx"], and thus, the oceans act as a net source of .5 Petagrams of carbon per year to the atmosphere.

    The authors find the tropical and Southern oceans act as net sources of CO2, while the temperate NH & SH and high latitude oceans act as net sinks [see figure 5 below] and “Our results emphasis the strong sensitivity of the oceanic carbon cycle to changes in mixed-layer depth, ocean currents and wind,” i.e. factors not incorporated in IPCC carbon cycle models.

    The paper illustrates that IPCC carbon cycle assumptions may be highly erroneous by a factor of up to five times, how little is actually known with confidence about the global carbon cycle, and suggests that ocean outgassing is the primary reason for the increase of atmospheric CO2 levels, rather than mankind.

    http://hockeyschtick.blogspot.com.au/2013/09/new-paper-finds-oceans-are-net-source.html

  26. #26 Nick
    September 17, 2013

    # 25, the paper does not suggest that ocean outgassing is the primary reason for observed atmospheric increase at all. The idiot blog is suggesting that. The numbers don’t support it.

  27. #27 BBD
    September 17, 2013

    #21

    Please don’t make up lies about what I did and did not say, Karen. The thermal isolation of Antarctica by the Antarctic Circumpolar current is an established geophysical fact. You can easily verify this yourself and I urge you to stop being a prat and do so forthwith. Please note that the effect is not absolute – the insulation is imperfect (of course) – you are being very fucking stupid about this, as usual.

  28. #28 BBD
    September 17, 2013

    #9

    Still trying to wriggle out of your latest undisownable mistake, Luke! You pitiful insect, you!

    Still trying to pretend that paleoclimate evidence isn’t evidence and that paleoclimate isn’t climatology… truly the last throes of desperation!

    Still making up lies about my private life in the vilest imaginable way! Did I mention extremes of desperation? I did? Well, it bears repeating.

    Your questions – such as they were – were dealt with repeatedly a long time ago.

    So why are you still here being parodically offensive? As I have now said twice, we know what you are and you’ve exhausted your small repertoire of tricks and pratfalls.

    Now you are simply being boring and repetitive. Time to go, Luke.

  29. #29 Nick
    September 17, 2013

    #25. If you read the abstract of Levy et al, you will note there is no mention of a net outgassing to the atmosphere,or anything from which ‘The Hokeyschtick’s’ could base a claim on ocean contribution significance. It is not relevant to the major findings of the paper. You might also notice that the ‘ocean’ that the scientists are working on in their new model is described as ‘pre-industrial’. So anthropogenic contribution to oceanic fluxes is not discussed or accounted in this model. The ocean is,in the industrial era of the last couple a hundred years, a sink.

    Kaz, you’ve been sucked in again by the ‘Hokey-Pokey-Stick’ creeps…perhaps you won’t be so gullible next time.

  30. #30 BBD
    September 17, 2013

    Right, Karen.

    Have you now researched the Antarctic Circumpolar Current (ACC)? Do you know what the Tasmanian Gateway and the Drake Passage are? Does the period ~34Ma – 32Ma mean something? Are the terms “Eocene-Oligocene transition” and “Oi-1 glaciation” familiar now? Good.

    That’s how it all got started. Now, here’s how upwelling warm water is melting ice shelves today. I’ve already posted this link, but you obviously didn’t bother reading it, so this is just the pretty picture. Interested readers will find the link to all the sciencey words at the bottom of this comment.

    Look at the picture. The black areas of the indices show the extent to which basal melt is contributing to ice mass loss. The shaded areas indicate the contribution from calving. Remember, Karen, up until recently, it was thought that calving was the primary mechanism by which glaciers lost mass. Only now are we beginning to realise that this was wrong, and basal melt is a major – and increasing – factor.

    This is real Karen. The scientists aren’t fabricating the evidence and I’m not lying to you about it either. I’m just trying to explain how it is.

    You seem to fancy yourself as a bit of a cryosphere whiz, but you aren’t. Rather, you are a serial dupe of misinformers like Morano and the Hockey Schtick blogger.

    The painful irony here is that you really *are* being lied to and deceived – but not by me.

    Look the other way, Karen. Look the other way.

    Warm Ocean Causing Most Antarctic Ice Shelf Mass Loss

  31. #31 Karen
    September 17, 2013
  32. #32 BBD
    September 17, 2013

    @ #29 Nick

    Thanks for clarifying that. It’s always a misrepresentation and frequently a downright lie isn’t it? Every single time.

  33. #33 BBD
    September 17, 2013

    Did you read it Karen? What does it say? Why should we bother?

  34. #34 BBD
    September 17, 2013

    And have you *nothing* to say about #30? Are you just going to skip over yet another of your mistakes and misconceptions as if it never happened? I suppose you are. It’s what you always do, after all.

    Have you ever considered learning at all? It’s fun, self-enhancing and good for the tone of the mind!

  35. #35 BBD
    September 17, 2013

    Ah. Grove & Switsur (1994). An obsolete study that doesn’t actually say quite what you think it does.

    IPCC TAR WG1:

    2.3.3 Was there a Little Ice Age and a Medieval Warm Period?

    The terms Little Ice Age and Medieval Warm Period have been used to describe two past climate epochs in Europe and neighbouring regions during roughly the 17th to 19th and 11th to 14th centuries, respectively. The timing, however, of these cold and warm periods has recently been demonstrated to vary geographically over the globe in a considerable way (Bradley and Jones, 1993; Hughes and Diaz, 1994; Crowley and Lowery, 2000). Evidence from mountain glaciers does suggest increased glaciation in a number of widely spread regions outside Europe prior to the 20th century, including Alaska, New Zealand and Patagonia (Grove and Switsur, 1994). However, the timing of maximum glacial advances in these regions differs considerably, suggesting that they may represent largely independent regional climate changes, not a globally-synchronous increased glaciation (see Bradley, 1999). Thus current evidence does not support globally synchronous periods of anomalous cold or warmth over this timeframe, and the conventional terms of Little Ice Age and Medieval Warm Period appear to have limited utility in describing trends in hemispheric or global mean temperature changes in past centuries. With the more widespread proxy data and multi-proxy reconstructions of temperature change now available, the spatial and temporal character of these putative climate epochs can be reassessed.

    And here we are, in 2013, with the most up-to-date global collaborative research involving dozens of authors saying exactly the same thing:

    PAGES 2k Consortium (2013) Continental-scale temperature variability during the past two millennia

    Past global climate changes had strong regional expression. To elucidate their spatio-temporal pattern, we reconstructed past temperatures for seven continental-scale regions during the past one to two millennia. The most coherent feature in nearly all of the regional temperature reconstructions is a long-term cooling trend, which ended late in the nineteenth century. At multi-decadal to centennial scales, temperature variability shows distinctly different regional patterns, with more similarity within each hemisphere than between them. There were no globally synchronous multi-decadal warm or cold intervals that define a worldwide Medieval Warm Period or Little Ice Age, but all reconstructions show generally cold conditions between ad 1580 and 1880, punctuated in some regions by warm decades during the eighteenth century. The transition to these colder conditions occurred earlier in the Arctic, Europe and Asia than in North America or the Southern Hemisphere regions. Recent warming reversed the long-term cooling; during the period ad 1971–2000, the area-weighted average reconstructed temperature was higher than any other time in nearly 1,400 years.

  36. #36 BBD
    September 17, 2013

    Learn, Karen.

    We aren’t lying to you. Morano, Watts, Hockey Schtick, Monckeybrains, “Goddard”, Montford etc – all the shills and shysters and clowns – they are lying to you.

  37. #37 Karen
    September 17, 2013

    #34 BBD re #30

    Is the pretty picture representative of prior warming occurrences?

    Or, do you think this is a brand noo phenomenon?

  38. #38 BBD
    September 17, 2013

    It has happened before and it is new, Karen. Binary logic. The Antarctic is beginning to respond to increased upwelling modulated by strengthening zonal windfields. Something unusual is happening. Trying to pretend that it’s all natural variability is just denial. Same goes for Arctic sea ice volume decrease.

  39. #39 BBD
    September 17, 2013

    CO2-forced warming and OHC increase is *real* Karen. The scientists are observing and describing the various changes, not fabricating them. The liars are all on the other team, the team composed mainly of non-expert ideologues and paid shills.

  40. #40 pentaxZ
    September 17, 2013

    jeffie, your poor excuse for a scientist. So you claim the polar bears are threatened? Don’t think so. What a joke you are.

    http://polarbearscience.com/2013/09/08/how-and-why-great-news-about-chukchi-polar-bears-has-been-suppressed/

  41. #41 pentaxZ
    September 17, 2013

    And jeffie, you really can’t give a simple question a simple answer. BTW, in which way is the rate of the “global warming” “unprecedented” and how can it be when we have a stand still in the rise the last 17 years? Watch and learn, moron!

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JpfMM3bVbhQ

  42. #42 BBD
    September 17, 2013

    #41 Youtube? You prat.

    Look up. See #35:

    PAGES 2k:

    Recent warming reversed the long-term cooling; during the period ad 1971–2000, the area-weighted average reconstructed temperature was higher than any other time in nearly 1,400 years.

    Read the words.

  43. #43 BBD
    September 17, 2013

    how can it be when we have a stand still in the rise the last 17 years?

    First, this claim is false. Please actually view this graph. Second, you and I have been through this repeatedly on the other thread, so why are you still lying about it here? Explain your dishonest behaviour.

    Third, you are doing the standard denier stupid. A slight increase in the rate of ocean heat uptake has slowed the rate of tropospheric warming. Nobody thinks this is anything other than temporary. Surface warming will resume and when it does, as dear old Luke said, it will be open season on the fake sceptics, liars, paid shills etc who have made this meme so central to their “argument”. Oh yes.

    Meanwhile, energy continues to accumulate in the climate system as expected. Ocean heat content continues to increase.

    Try to remember and *understand* climate basic #1:

    The troposphere ≠ the climate system.

    That is all.

  44. #44 pentaxZ
    September 17, 2013

    Hahaha, who do you think yoy are foling bbd, other than the true believers? You know, the problem isn’t the future getting warmer, but the past getting cooler. And that’s due to warmists massaging data to fit the dogma. Loser!

  45. #45 BBD
    September 17, 2013

    #44

    Both a lie and a tinfoil-hat conspiracy theory.

    I’m afraid resorting to either means *you* lose. Resorting to both is just pissing on your own grave.

  46. #46 BBD
    September 17, 2013

    Where is your response to #43?

  47. #47 Nick
    September 17, 2013

    #41 The rate of warming is unprecedented in the last 9000 years,which is the period in which we have begun to flourish.

    Bob Carter, introduced by Jennifer Marohasy? Two bullshit artists. Bob, co-author of a deceitful paper that detrended data by design, and claimed that there was no trend as a result! The man who lied about accepting payment for his ‘advocacy’ with a lobby group.

    Marohasy is an ex-IPA shill. Tries it on. Everyone who wants to rationalise water use in the MDB is wrong and she’s right. Last year she wanted to fit up Snowy Hydro for exacerbating the Murrumbidgee floods by continuing to divert Murray water into the ‘bidgee catchment during the downpour, and was canvassing the media to run with the story. She hadn’t done her homework: the stream gauge history [public access] told the real story. Snowy Hydro did not add to the peak. A boofhead.

  48. #48 BBD
    September 17, 2013

    #47

    The rate of warming is unprecedented in the last 9000 years,which is the period in which we have begun to flourish.

    It does look that way. I assume you are thinking of Marcott et al. (2013)?

    By a happy coincidence, this very topic is examined at RC in a new post here.

  49. #49 pentaxZ
    September 17, 2013

    bbd dear, my answer is the video that tim persist deleting. But that’s the alarmistas way, if you can’t argue, use the delete button. That, and pure lying, is all you culprits have left. Even IPCC admits that the vanished warming is kind of a problem. But no, not the regular fanatics populating this blog. The warming have somehow gotten down in the deep ocean, without the ARGO buoys noticing it. Must be some kind of ninja heat.

  50. #50 pentaxZ
    September 17, 2013

    Now, let’s see how long untill this highly informative video gets deleted.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JpfMM3bVbhQ

  51. #51 Nick
    September 17, 2013

    #50 hey, you paranoid weirdo, the link to the last clip is still operational. Now we have the same again. Twice-as- stupid Bob Carter! Looking forward to your detailed defence of his paper with Maclean and De Freitas….

  52. #52 Karen
    September 17, 2013

    “The rate of warming is unprecedented in the last 9000 years,”

    wank wank wank wank wank wank wank wank wank wank wank wank wank wank wank wank wank wank wank wank wank wank wank wank wank wank wank wank wank wank wank wank wank wank wank wank

  53. #53 Karen
    September 17, 2013

    #38 BBD,

    lol……….. no normal person believes your bullshit

  54. #54 Karen
    September 17, 2013

    “Must be some kind of ninja heat.”

    lol

  55. #55 BBD
    September 17, 2013

    #49

    Eh? What the fuck are you on about? The two-liars video is exactly as you originally posted it.

    As for Teh Stupid about the vertical transport of warm water, you need to google “Ekman pumping” and “subtropical gyres”. As always with you lot the problem is your abysmal topic knowledge. Just because you don’t understand it doesn’t mean that it is not real. Get this into your ignorant skull. Also note that argument from ignorance and argument from incredulity are logical fallacies. They negate your comments. You are saying nothing.

    FFS.

  56. #56 BBD
    September 17, 2013

    #52

    Read the fucking links above you stupid little shit.

  57. #57 chek
    September 17, 2013

    PantieZ @ #49,

    The warming have somehow gotten down in the deep ocean, without the ARGO buoys noticing it. Must be some kind of ninja heat.

    Your fellow-travelling moron loved that exposition of your appalling ignorance, but if the Argo buoys aren’t measuring it, how else is it being measured? Or is this yet another of your tin foil hat conspiracy theories?

  58. #58 chek
    September 17, 2013

    no normal person

    Given that you’re a lolling, illiterate idiot, spending all day, every day cackling away to yourself while copy’n’pasting from Morano’s shit-hole and its satellites and consequently shown to be wrong at every turn, how would you know anything about ‘normal people’?

  59. #59 Karen
    September 17, 2013

    The world has warmed 0 degrees Celsius (0 degrees Fahrenheit) per decade over the past 15 years, a fraction of the 0.2ºC (0.36ºF) per decade rate confidently predicted by the U.N. six years ago, according to a leaked copy of the foremost climate report in the world.

  60. #60 chek
    September 17, 2013

    .. and no cite from SpamKan. But that’s good enough in idiotland.

  61. #61 pentaxZ
    September 17, 2013

    Karen, it must be hard being a warmist monger these days. Nothing in the real world will comply with the models. No warming, no increase in bad weather, thriving polar bears, record growth in polar ice, no hotspot to be seen anywhere, ninja heat in the deep oceans no one has detected, not a single climate refugee anywhere, no extinct animals anywhere, no accelerating sea level rise, the world is getting greener. All this despite steady rising co2 levels. And as a topping on the cake, the 97% of scientists meme was at a closer inspection only 0,3%.No wonder people are loosing faith in the CAGW religion. ;-)

  62. #62 chek
    September 17, 2013

    And no data to back up any of your blathering PantieZ, who buys into every denier delusion available.

  63. #63 Karen
    September 17, 2013

    #61 pentaxZ, they have no hope now, the media has woken up and the floodgates of truth have burst open :)

  64. #64 Karen
    September 17, 2013

    “A leaked draft of a report by the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change is understood to concede that the computer predictions for global warming and the effects of carbon emissions have been proved to be inaccurate. ”

    lol

  65. #65 Lionel A
    September 17, 2013

    Karen #52

    Needs some of those med’s freddy is on, and fast.

    Karen is another clot I shall only refer to in passing in future. Karen is diving down the snake of regression as fast as Judith but from a much lower base. Those drilling ice and sediment cores could use her/him/it as a drill so deep into doo does this entity go.

  66. #66 Karen
    September 17, 2013

    “Despite the uncertainties and contradictions, the IPCC insists that it is more confident than ever – 5 per cent certain – that global warming is mainly (maybe) human’s fault. “

  67. #67 Lionel A
    September 17, 2013

    Note how twerps like ‘bust-camera’ insist on referring to faith and religion. This is a measure of how hopeless it is trying to educate them, they require re-programming first.

  68. #68 BBD
    September 17, 2013

    Two fuckwits chorusing rubbish and ignoring the *science*.

    See #43 and #55 above.

    Notice, lurkers, how these two clowns simply blank the corrections to their lies and then repeat their lies.

    #43!

    #55!

  69. #69 BBD
    September 17, 2013

    5 per cent certain

    Oh FFS. 95% confidence levels or higher.

  70. #70 Karen
    September 17, 2013

    “Those drilling ice and sediment cores could use her/him/it as a drill so deep into doo does this entity go.”

    lol………… Your meds are stronger Lionel :)

  71. #71 chek
    September 17, 2013

    SpamKan @#64

    is understood to concede

    Now that, no matter how you parse it, is worth a back slapping ‘lol’ for any self-satisfied sophist wondering what a moron will buy. But somehow I don’t think that’s what SpamKan’s lol was for.

  72. #72 BBD
    September 17, 2013

    See the utterly blatant, quite completely shameless lying.

    It is jaw-dropping. I have never seen the like of it anywhere else but in the climate “debate”. This is what happens when ideologues and shills collide head-first with reality. They project with such pop-eyed, clench-arsed desperation that they invert reality.

  73. #73 BBD
    September 17, 2013

    The world has warmed 0 degrees Celsius (0 degrees Fahrenheit) per decade over the past 15 years

    The old, old cherry-pick: take 1998 as the start point. Yes, 1998 – the very peak of the biggest El Nino of the century.

    Let’s start at 1999. Oh look!

    See how it’s done, lurkers?

  74. #74 BBD
    September 17, 2013

    Then of course you can refer to never-seen, never-directly-quoted “leaks”… You can find this shit written up in various Murdoch rags which have rehashed the original bunch of lies printed by David “Pinocchio ” Rose in the Mail and since universally debunked.

    Keep repeating the lies! It’s all you’ve got, after all!

  75. #75 Karen
    September 17, 2013

    BBD thinks he is on stage…………. lol

  76. #76 Karen
    September 17, 2013

    Lurkers, watch this short clip !!!!!!!!!!

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fAlMomLvu_4

  77. #77 Lotharsson
    September 17, 2013

    Harvey, could you please stop spamming the thread with off topic rubbish!

    Bugger. There goes another irony meter. That was an industrial strength one too.

    If you read the abstract of Levy et al, you will note there is no mention of a net outgassing to the atmosphere,or anything from which ‘The Hokeyschtick’s’ could base a claim on ocean contribution significance.

    Remember, folks, Karen’s purpose here is to post lies.

    Are you just going to skip over yet another of your mistakes and misconceptions as if it never happened?

    Yes.

    Remember, Karen’s purpose here is

    And while we’re at it:

    …how can it be when we have a stand still in the rise the last 17 years?

    Remember, pentaxZ’s purpose here is to post lies.

    And while we’re at it:

    That, and pure lying, is all you culprits have left.

    Altogether now: it’s always projection

  78. #78 Karen
    September 17, 2013

    “As facts change, so must policy. The EU must change course and in the UK the Climate Change act must be thrown on the scrap heap of mistaken ideas,” he said. “

  79. #79 Karen
    September 17, 2013

    “Regardless of whether or not scientists are wrong on global warming, the European Union is pursuing the correct energy policies even if they lead to higher prices, Europe’s climate commissioner has said. ”

    lol…………… It’s snowballing, :)

  80. #80 BBD
    September 17, 2013

    LOL….. it’s desperately trying to diver attention from being called on its lies!

  81. #81 BBD
    September 17, 2013

    The world has warmed 0 degrees Celsius (0 degrees Fahrenheit) per decade over the past 15 years

    Lie – see #73. Admit the lie, Karen!

  82. #82 Karen
    September 17, 2013

    “Obama Laughed at When Referring to The Overwhelming Scientific Evidence on Climate Change.”

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q20cnn8vOfg

    lol

  83. #83 BBD
    September 17, 2013

    And don’t forget Karen – the oceans are part of the world too! It’s not *just* troposphere!

    And ooh – look at OHC!

    You are a liar Karen!

  84. #84 BBD
    September 17, 2013

    When are you going to admit to your lies Karen!

  85. #85 Nick
    September 17, 2013

    #75, Kaz thinks she has a point

    #76, classy stuff Kaz, enjoy your hate video…still smarting from not knowing the fuck what the thermosphere is, failing to know the difference between farenheit and celsius, getting fooled by Christy’s sleight-of-hand, confusing a model of pre-industrial ocean conditions with current climate, and etc…..every puerile ‘gotcha’ you brought got turned back on you….truly a zombie denier, lumbering on powered by humiliation and fear. Sad fool.

  86. #86 BBD
    September 17, 2013

    Lies lies lies lies Karen!

    :-)

  87. #87 chek
    September 17, 2013

    It’s snowballing

    .. in hell. SpamKan. The thing about your echo chamber is that just the one same old source creates multiple echoes. But there’s still just the one source.

    The EU spokesman, speaking hypothetically, confirms that renewable energy is here to stay. Climate change only makes that policy more imperative, no matter what the GWPF clowns say.

  88. #88 Nick
    September 17, 2013

    #82…so there are more fools like you ,Kaz…who knew?

  89. #89 bill
    September 17, 2013

    In idiot world it’s ‘controversial’ that shifting away from reliance on Russian fossil fuel exports is sound energy policy for Europe.

    Just add the usual lashings of Bad Faith and you’ve got another occasion for Telegraph readers to wee themselves; a secret delight for them, as demonstrated above.

    Could you nongs sink any lower? We will certainly find out…

  90. #90 Karen
    September 17, 2013

    lol……… I just beat you guyz up with my little finger :)

    sweet dreams nuffies

  91. #91 BBD
    September 17, 2013

    #90

    No, you didn’t Karen! You got shown up as a liar and a know-nothing *again*! Just like every other time!

  92. #92 BBD
    September 17, 2013

    Lies! Lies! Lies!

    Naughty Karen! Off to bed with no supper!

  93. #93 Karen
    September 17, 2013

    #91 BBD

    Stamping your little feet will get you nowhere !

  94. #94 chek
    September 17, 2013

    … it’s your brainless spamming and even more brainless rejoinders that are getting nowhere SpamKan.

  95. #95 Nick
    September 17, 2013

    #94 ,Kaz, using your little brain has not exactly got you very far,has it? Sleep tight, blithering idiot. You’ve learned a lot today,and in the morning you will have forgotten it all….

  96. #96 BBD
    September 17, 2013

    Stamping on your lies is a pleasure, Karen! That’s why I do it.

  97. #97 BBD
    September 17, 2013

    Before my time here, but does anyone remember the Denial Tango?

    Do please look if in need of a wry chuckle or two.

    ;-)

  98. #98 Lionel A
    September 17, 2013

    Oh look, Karen is so desperate she/he/it has to dredge up a cartoon, yes a cartoon, based on long, and repeatedly debunked ‘Climategate’ memes and then doubles down in desperation with another where she/he/it thinks Obama is being laughed at when he touches on ‘those who disagree with the overwhelming scientific evidence on climate change’.

    The fool/tool/drool not realising that it is those, like Rose, Limbaugh, Inhofe, Faux-crew, Morono, Mc-intiring, Milltoy, Beck-shrek, Carthorse, Moutbank1, Mountbank2, who are being laughed at.

    Not much logic ability or self awareness in the Karen box is there.

  99. #99 Nick
    September 17, 2013

    #96. Kaz is unable to be reached. In too deep to pull out.
    She’s not alone, of course

  100. #100 Berendaneke
    September 17, 2013

    Hahahaha, the moron BBD :evil: excrements:

    “the oceans are part of the world too”

    Now for once he likes the oceans as being part of the world. However when I educate him, that the global temperature fakers in CRU, GISS and NOAA calculate their “Global Temperatures” there are practically no temperature air measurements from the oceans, i.e. ca. 71% of the earth’s surface. Now BBD does not like to be reminded of the oceans: BBD :evil: the partisan clown.

    In addition BBD :evil: does not know how many stations are covered in the GHCN database!!!! hahahahaha :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

    Again:
    In addition BBD :evil: does not know how many stations are covered in the GHCN database!!!! hahahahaha :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

    And once more:
    In addition BBD :evil: does not know how many stations are covered in the GHCN database!!!! hahahahaha :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

    ALL: “There is no AGW …”