Trump’s Right: New Year’s Eve May Be The Coldest On Record

Yet every time there is an extreme weather event like the recent hurricanes, immediately there is a veritable Greek chorus claiming that global warming is responsible.

Sent from my Lenovo K8 using Tapatalk

No it is the accretive effect of many of those events that culminates in the greek chorus, much with climate scientists conducting. You really need to change your evil ways.
 
The most difficult scientific measurement to take is Temperature. There is no way that science can accurately measure the temperature of all the world's oceans to a tenth of a degree. Don't doubt me.

Yet you believe them when they tell you how many fish are in the ocean.
:facepalm:
:evilnod:
 
Big Dog doesn't understand that we have big tools for the job of measuring global temps.
He is a spec on the giant ball. We have satellites everywhere, weather stations everywhere,
computer linkups everywhere, and math weather eggheads everywhere that measure and calculate this stuff
everywhere, all the time, every day. When you bring that much power and knowhow and will to a complex
problem, it gets solved, and well.

Republicans cant see the whole board. Small minds.
 
Yet you believe them when they tell you how many fish are in the ocean.

How many fish are in the ocean????

At least you don't dispute the difficulty of measuring the total heat contained in the world's oceans to the tenth degree. :palm:
 
Big Dog doesn't understand that we have big tools for the job of measuring global temps.
He is a spec on the giant ball. We have satellites everywhere, weather stations everywhere,
computer linkups everywhere, and math weather eggheads everywhere that measure and calculate this stuff
everywhere, all the time, every day. When you bring that much power and knowhow and will to a complex
problem, it gets solved, and well.

Republicans cant see the whole board. Small minds.

Science doesn't even understand Ocean currents, much less, have the ability to accurately measure their temps.

Are you comparing to satellite weahter data from the 1870's? :palm:

You're just digging your hole deeper, moron.

Solved? :rofl2:
 
Yet every time there is an extreme weather event like the recent hurricanes, immediately there is a veritable Greek chorus claiming that global warming is responsible.

True, and that's just as stupid as saying "There's no climate change because it's cold at my house" which is the "science" we get from RWNJs.
 
How many fish are in the ocean????

At least you don't dispute the difficulty of measuring the total heat contained in the world's oceans to the tenth degree. :palm:
Paul Allen has just donated millions to buy some more deep ocean Argo buoys as there so few of them at present. Vast areas of the planet surface are just not covered. The only universal coverage is by satellites but they concentrate primarily on the troposphere.

https://www.seattletimes.com/seattl...-bankrolls-deep-ocean-climate-change-project/

Sent from my Lenovo K8 using Tapatalk
 
True, and that's just as stupid as saying "There's no climate change because it's cold at my house" which is the "science" we get from RWNJs.
If you cannot say anything sensible I suggest that you go forth and multiply. I am neither right wing or a nutjob, but there are plenty of LWNJs on here. The jury is still out on you.

Sent from my Lenovo K8 using Tapatalk
 
Some predict a Maunder Minimum to begin within the next decade and record cold on New Years will be the new normal for decades.
If that happens we should all root for AGW to be true.

Yeah. I've been following the solar cycles for almost two decades now; have a web site devoted to it built in 2000. We are approaching the end of Solar Cycle 24. At the tail end of SC 23, the sci guys were predicting, based on 23, that 24 would be unusually strong. They were wrong; SC 24 was one of the weakest in decades. So it's hard to guess at this point what SC 25 is going to be like.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_cycle_24
 
Yeah. I've been following the solar cycles for almost two decades now; have a web site devoted to it built in 2000. We are approaching the end of Solar Cycle 24. At the tail end of SC 23, the sci guys were predicting, based on 23, that 24 would be unusually strong. They were wrong; SC 24 was one of the weakest in decades. So it's hard to guess at this point what SC 25 is going to be like.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_cycle_24
Here is a paper in Nature by Prof. Henrik Svensmark on the subject of increased ionisation causing a growth of aerosols into cloud condensation nuclei. The ionisation increase is the result of more cosmic rays reaching the atmosphere, due to an attenuation of the solar wind by the lack of sunspots.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-017-02082-2





Sent from my Lenovo K8 using Tapatalk
 
Yeah. I've been following the solar cycles for almost two decades now; have a web site devoted to it built in 2000. We are approaching the end of Solar Cycle 24. At the tail end of SC 23, the sci guys were predicting, based on 23, that 24 would be unusually strong. They were wrong; SC 24 was one of the weakest in decades. So it's hard to guess at this point what SC 25 is going to be like.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_cycle_24

Let's hope they're wrong again. I'd much rather have warmer temps than colder.

Happy New Year to you Owl.
 
True, and that's just as stupid as saying "There's no climate change because it's cold at my house" which is the "science" we get from RWNJs.
So is that any different to your new bestie Rana, when she looked out of her window and decided that the world was dangerously heating up worldwide?

Sent from my Lenovo K8 using Tapatalk
 
"Obviously, he is referencing the Left's screams and howls everytime some podunk town sets a weather record or a hurricane makes landfall." Bd #21
If so, then the falsification is validated.

But your assertion is not so.
It's the "one in 500 year" storms, flooding in Texas, & storms like Sandy here in NY that help tell the tale.
But your mind is obviously already made up. I won't attempt to confuse you with the facts.
"So, just to be clear, what is your definition of climate???" Bd #21
a) That wouldn't matter, as I'm not the OED.

b) Defining "climate" is not enough to address the topic issue.

For that it's necessary to define both "climate", & "weather" and distinguish one from the other. SPOILER ALERT: they are not synonyms.
 
If so, then the falsification is validated.

But your assertion is not so.
It's the "one in 500 year" storms, flooding in Texas, & storms like Sandy here in NY that help tell the tale.
But your mind is obviously already made up. I won't attempt to confuse you with the facts.

a) That wouldn't matter, as I'm not the OED.

b) Defining "climate" is not enough to address the topic issue.


For that it's necessary to define both "climate", & "weather" and distinguish one from the other. SPOILER ALERT: they are not synonyms.

Ok ... I'll mark you down as "Don't Know".
 
President Donald Trump’s latest global warming tweet has sent liberal pundits and scientists into a frenzy, going after the president for allegedly not knowing the difference between “weather” and “climate.”

But the frenzy surrounding Trump’s tweet is missing one important detail — he was right that New Year’s Eve could be the coldest on record for the eastern U.S. when the clock strikes midnight.

Okay, I know Trump thinks this is all a Chinese Hoax, but the reason it's called "global warming" is because it deals with long term trends at the global scale, discounting natural variations regionally on the planet. The "eastern United States" constitutes, what about two percent of the geographic area of the earth's surface? The proper question here, is, what is temperature and climate doing at the global scale?

On another tangent, while I feel guilty saying this living in California, but I was hoping Hudson Bay would freeze over -- I was getting a tad worried about the Polar bears and their habitat!
 
If so, then the falsification is validated.

But your assertion is not so.
It's the "one in 500 year" storms, flooding in Texas, & storms like Sandy here in NY that help tell the tale.
But your mind is obviously already made up. I won't attempt to confuse you with the facts.

a) That wouldn't matter, as I'm not the OED.

b) Defining "climate" is not enough to address the topic issue.

For that it's necessary to define both "climate", & "weather" and distinguish one from the other. SPOILER ALERT: they are not synonyms.
Looks like we have another Chauncey Gardiner candidate, asides from Crap on a Post.

Sent from my Lenovo K8 using Tapatalk
 
Okay, I know Trump thinks this is all a Chinese Hoax, but the reason it's called "global warming" is because it deals with long term trends at the global scale, discounting natural variations regionally on the planet. The "eastern United States" constitutes, what about two percent of the geographic area of the earth's surface? The proper question here, is, what is temperature and climate doing at the global scale?

On another tangent, while I feel guilty saying this living in California, but I was hoping Hudson Bay would freeze over -- I was getting a tad worried about the Polar bears and their habitat!

OMG ... you're STILL falling for the Al Gorian polar bear extinction hoax :palm:

That was debunked ages ago.
 
Back
Top