Report: Global warming didn't cause big US drought (Update)

Apr 11, 2013 by Seth Borenstein
In this Aug. 16, 2012 file photo, drought-damaged corn is seen in a field near Nickerson, Neb. A new federal science report looking at last year's Midwestern drought says it was a freak of nature that wasn't caused by man-made global warming. The 50-page drought task force report written by dozens of scientists from five different federal agencies looked into why forecasters didn't see the more than $12 billion drought coming. The researchers concluded that it was so unusual and unpredictable that it couldn't have been forecast. (AP Photo/Nati Harnik, File)

Last year's huge drought was a freak of nature that wasn't caused by man-made global warming, a new federal science study finds.

Scientists say the lack of moisture usually pushed up from the Gulf of Mexico was the main reason for the drought in the American heartland.

Thursday's report by dozens of scientists from five different federal agencies looked into why forecasters didn't see the drought coming. The researchers concluded that it was so unusual and unpredictable that it couldn't have been forecast.

"This is one of those events that comes along once every couple hundreds of years," said lead author Martin Hoerling, a research meteorologist at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. "Climate change was not a significant part, if any, of the event."

Researchers focused on six states—Wyoming, Kansas, Nebraska, Colorado, Missouri and Iowa—but the drought spread much farther and eventually included nearly two-thirds of the Lower 48 states. For the six states, the drought was the worst four-month period for lack of rainfall since records started being kept in 1895, Hoerling said.

He said the jet stream that draws moisture north from the Gulf was stuck unusually north in Canada.

Other scientists have linked recent changes in the jet stream to shrinking Arctic sea ice, but Hoerling and study co-author Richard Seager of Columbia University said those global warming connections are not valid.

Hoerling used computer simulations to see if he could replicate the drought using man-made global warming conditions. He couldn't. So that means it was a random event, he said.

Using similar methods, Hoerling has been able to attribute increasing droughts in the Mediterranean Sea region to climate change and found that greenhouse gases could be linked to a small portion of the 2011 Texas heat wave.

Another scientist though, blasted the report.

Kevin Trenberth, climate analysis chief at the National Center for Atmospheric Research, a federally funded university-run research center, said the report didn't take into account the lack of snowfall in the Rockies the previous winter and how that affected overall moisture in the air. Nor did the study look at the how global warming exacerbated the high pressure system that kept the jet stream north and the rainfall away, he said.

"This was natural variability exacerbated by global warming," Trenberth said in an email. "That is true of all such events from the Russian heat wave of 2010, to the drought and heat waves in Australia."

Hoerling noted that in the past 20 years, the world is seeing more La Ninas, the occasional cooling of the central Pacific Ocean that is the flip side of El Nino. Hoerling said that factor, not part of global warming but part of a natural cycle, increases the chances of such droughts.

Some regions should see more droughts as the world warms because of greenhouse gases from the burning of fossil fuels like coal, oil and gas, he said. But the six state area isn't expected to get an increase of droughts from global warming—unlike parts of the Southwest—Hoerling said.

Explore further: Coastal defences could contribute to flooding with sea-level rise

4 /5 (8 votes)
add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

Today's severe drought, tomorrow's normal

Dec 06, 2011

(PhysOrg.com) -- While the worst drought since the Dust Bowl of the 1930s grips Oklahoma and Texas, scientists are warning that what we consider severe drought conditions in North America today may be normal ...

Fire and rain: Fed scientists point to wild April

May 10, 2011

(AP) -- April was a historic month for wild weather in the United States, and it wasn't just the killer tornado outbreak that set records, according to scientists with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

Iowa scientists: Drought a sign of climate change

Nov 19, 2012

More than 130 scientists from Iowa colleges and universities say this year's drought is consistent with a warmer climate predicted as part of global climate change and more droughts can be expected.

Recommended for you

Tracking giant kelp from space

15 hours ago

Citizen scientists worldwide are invited to take part in marine ecology research, and they won't have to get their feet wet to do it. The Floating Forests project, an initiative spearheaded by scientists ...

Heavy metals and hydroelectricity

17 hours ago

Hydraulic engineering is increasingly relied on for hydroelectricity generation. However, redirecting stream flow can yield unintended consequences. In the August 2014 issue of GSA Today, Donald Rodbell of ...

What's wiping out the Caribbean corals?

17 hours ago

Here's what we know about white-band disease: It has already killed up to 95 percent of the Caribbean's reef-building elkhorn and staghorn corals, and it's caused by an infectious bacteria that seems to be ...

User comments : 86

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

The Alchemist
1.3 / 5 (16) Apr 12, 2013
No not Global Warming. But look what must happen to weather patterns due to GW: There must be a reduction in the equator to polar flux that is our weather...
Of course, that may have only been the feather that broke the camels back, but still, without the feather...
rwinners
2.3 / 5 (11) Apr 12, 2013
Hmmm... what about the drought of 2013?
Julian P_K
3.4 / 5 (10) Apr 12, 2013
Umm what? An unusual occurrence such is this is evidence of changes in the climate system, no? So what is changing? The concentration of CO2 which also increases water vapour altering weather patterns like the above occurrence. How does this in any way indicate Climate change is not occurring?
The Alchemist
1.4 / 5 (20) Apr 12, 2013
@JulianP_K, so I did a very little bit of digging, did you know the "increase" in CO2 is from the weather station on top of Mt. Mona Loa, an active volcano, spewing CO2, I assume. Rather than, some aglomeration of data, which I would have assumed.
Absolutely floored me... did everybody know this but me?
Kiwini
1.3 / 5 (14) Apr 12, 2013
"Mona Loa"?..... izzat the one near "Mona Kea"?

And yes, your assumption has the usual unflattering results. Its' self-anointed agglomeration is brain boiling in ways heretofore often seen.

Nice work....

Mother earth has her own schedule, and she's sometimes moody.
When that happens, the smart ones move out of the way, and the stupid ones point fingers in another attempt to blame that which can't be understood.

Then they try to tax it. :(
Egleton
1.2 / 5 (13) Apr 12, 2013
"Mona Loa"?..... izzat the one near "Mona Kea"?

Na. It is near Mona Hia. Mona Hia towers over Mona Loa.
Skepticus
2.6 / 5 (11) Apr 12, 2013
Stop growing corn, plant cherries instead. The yield has increased enormously during the past decade, judging from the healthy number of cherry pickers here and elsewhere.
dav_daddy
1.7 / 5 (18) Apr 12, 2013
Hmmm... what about the drought of 2013?


Ah yes the drought of 2013 the year where we had 2 inches of snow on the ground in Phoenix at the end of February!

If this southwest drought gets any worse this desert dweller is gunna have to buy tire chains & a snow shovel.
Maggnus
3.7 / 5 (13) Apr 12, 2013
@JulianP_K, so I did a very little bit of digging, did you know the "increase" in CO2 is from the weather station on top of Mt. Mona Loa, an active volcano, spewing CO2, I assume. Rather than, some aglomeration of data, which I would have assumed.
Absolutely floored me... did everybody know this but me?


Yes, Mauna Loa has been spewing CO2 in various amounts for as long as people have been able to measure it. Loihi does too. So?
ScooterG
1.6 / 5 (20) Apr 12, 2013
"Global warming didn't cause big US drought"

This simply cannot be correct. We all know every weather or climate event - pleasant or unpleasant, good or bad - is caused by global warming.
geokstr
1.4 / 5 (18) Apr 12, 2013
@JulianP_K, so I did a very little bit of digging, did you know the "increase" in CO2 is from the weather station on top of Mt. Mona Loa, an active volcano, spewing CO2, I assume. Rather than, some aglomeration of data, which I would have assumed.
Absolutely floored me... did everybody know this but me?


Yes, Mauna Loa has been spewing CO2 in various amounts for as long as people have been able to measure it. Loihi does too. So?

His point, obviously, is to wonder why they are measuring the increase in CO2 from a very active source of it, which could easily bias the readings towards the OMG-we're-all-gonna-die range, non?

Might as well locate all the temperature monitoring stations in the middle of steel processing plants and extrapolate world wide temperatures from that.
antigoracle
1.4 / 5 (18) Apr 12, 2013
Oh, the panic in the voices of the AGW Alarmist Fanatics. But, not to worry, salvation from your ignorance is coming, in the form of kool-aid. Be sure to drink it as fast as you swallowed the AGW lies.
ryggesogn2
1.7 / 5 (17) Apr 13, 2013
There was a similar drought in the 30s and in 70s.
The Great Plains were called a desert for a reason and the reason there were few trees was irregular rainfall.
On natural prairie, trees only grew near lakes, sloughs, creeks and rivers.
ubavontuba
1.4 / 5 (18) Apr 13, 2013
@JulianP_K, so I did a very little bit of digging, did you know the "increase" in CO2 is from the weather station on top of Mt. Mona Loa, an active volcano, spewing CO2, I assume. Rather than, some aglomeration of data, which I would have assumed.
Absolutely floored me... did everybody know this but me?
As I already posted elsewhere:

That's a good question. Here's NASA's official position (watch me get downranked, even for this);

http://earthobser...-record/

Howhot
4.3 / 5 (16) Apr 13, 2013
Ubbatubba, your nit-picking. There are 1000s of CO2 sampling stations across the world none on top of extinct volcanoes that measure the exact same increases. So your point is BS.

Here, look at this website if you want to know where we are as far as CO2 levels.

http://co2now.org

Back to the article, its not that droughts are unusual, although that is what the term drought means, and *unusually* long period of lack of precipitation. What has been different is the severity of the droughts, and that can be attributed to global warm. It was also the timing of their occurrence, just in the middle of growing season. Fact is, as global warming continues to worsen unchecked, events like the 2012 heatwave and the mid-american droughts can only become more common and wide spread.

At some point you have to be concerned about the food supply and question whether it is capable of withstanding radical climate change.

ubavontuba
1.5 / 5 (17) Apr 13, 2013
Ubbatubba, your nit-picking. There are 1000s of CO2 sampling stations across the world none on top of extinct volcanoes that measure the exact same increases. So your point is BS.
Proof you're an idiot. My reference was in regards to the reliability of the record. Which does happen to come from one source ...on a volcano! Did you not even bother to read it?

Here, look at this website if you want to know where we are as far as CO2 levels.

http://co2now.org
More proof you're an idiot. This data is from the same single source (Mauna Loa Observatory, Hawaii)! Do you not even bother to read you own references?

Seriously, do a little basic research before spouting off, will ya?

ubavontuba
1.5 / 5 (17) Apr 13, 2013
Back to the article, its not that droughts are unusual, although that is what the term drought means, and *unusually* long period of lack of precipitation. What has been different is the severity of the droughts, and that can be attributed to global warm. It was also the timing of their occurrence, just in the middle of growing season. Fact is, as global warming continues to worsen unchecked, events like the 2012 heatwave and the mid-american droughts can only become more common and wide spread.
LOL. Here, you're only arguing against the assertions in the article. So are you now saying climatologists don't know what they're doing?

At some point you have to be concerned about the food supply and question whether it is capable of withstanding radical climate change.
Idiot. Food grows better in a warming climate. You can't grow corn in permafrost.

ScooterG
1.5 / 5 (16) Apr 13, 2013
"the lack of moisture usually pushed up from the Gulf of Mexico was the main reason for the drought"

Yup...lack of moisture will cause drought every time.

I'll sleep better tonight knowing we have such intelligent people working on climate research!
VendicarE
4.3 / 5 (11) Apr 13, 2013
2 inches of snow = approx 0.2 inches of water.

"we had 2 inches of snow on the ground in Phoenix at the end of February!" - Day Daddy
VendicarE
4.3 / 5 (11) Apr 13, 2013

"Food grows better in a warming climate." - UbVonTard

That is why Venus is a major exporter of food. The Sahara desert is another significant exporter.

"You can't grow corn in permafrost." - UbVonTard

But you have repeatedly claimed that you will grow corn on the barren exposed rock of the Canadian Shield.

Idiot.

VendicarE
4.2 / 5 (10) Apr 13, 2013
Neither were as severe as the current drought.

"There was a similar drought in the 30s and in 70s." - RyggTard

2013 looks to be a continuation of 2012.

Like everything else in the U.S. Food production is in rapid decline.

VendicarE
4.2 / 5 (10) Apr 13, 2013
Odd how you claim the following...

"We all know every weather or climate event - pleasant or unpleasant, good or bad - is caused by global warming." - ScooTard

When every article I have ever seen makes the correct claim that no single weather event can be attributed to the ongoing warming of the globe.

VendicarE
4.4 / 5 (13) Apr 13, 2013
Your reference may be one source, but there are dozens of CO2 monitoring stations all over the globe.

"My reference was in regards to the reliability of the record. Which does happen to come from one source ...on a volcano!" - UbVonTard

And they all show the same increase in atmospheric CO2.

Idiot.
Sean_W
1.5 / 5 (16) Apr 14, 2013
Not long ago I was told by climate activists that only anti-science fools would deny that the drought was caused by global warming. I guess that "dozens of scientists from five different federal agencies" are anti-science fools.
ubavontuba
1.7 / 5 (17) Apr 14, 2013

"Food grows better in a warming climate." - Uba

That is why Venus is a major exporter of food. The Sahara desert is another significant exporter.
Idiot. California's central valley is one of the hottest places on earth, and it is also some of the most productive farmland on earth.

"You can't grow corn in permafrost." - Uba

But you have repeatedly claimed that you will grow corn on the barren exposed rock of the Canadian Shield.

Idiot.
Idiot. There's lots of arable soil in Canada, now. Warming will only increase the available acreage and yields.

ubavontuba
1.5 / 5 (16) Apr 14, 2013
Neither were as severe as the current drought.

2013 looks to be a continuation of 2012.

Like everything else in the U.S. Food production is in rapid decline.
Idiot spambot. The NOAA just reported the drought had nothing to do with global warming.

ubavontuba
1.5 / 5 (17) Apr 14, 2013
Your reference may be one source, but there are dozens of CO2 monitoring stations all over the globe.

"My reference was in regards to the reliability of the record. Which does happen to come from one source ...on a volcano!" - Uba

And they all show the same increase in atmospheric CO2.

Idiot.
Idiot spambot. You totally missed the context. Try again.

deepsand
3 / 5 (22) Apr 14, 2013

"Food grows better in a warming climate." - Uba

That is why Venus is a major exporter of food. The Sahara desert is another significant exporter.
Idiot. California's central valley is one of the hottest places on earth, and it is also some of the most productive farmland on earth.

"You can't grow corn in permafrost." - Uba

But you have repeatedly claimed that you will grow corn on the barren exposed rock of the Canadian Shield.

Idiot.
Idiot. There's lots of arable soil in Canada, now. Warming will only increase the available acreage and yields.

Idiot.

You can't grow squat on the barren exposed rock of the Canadian Shield.
ubavontuba
1.3 / 5 (16) Apr 14, 2013

"Food grows better in a warming climate." - Uba

That is why Venus is a major exporter of food. The Sahara desert is another significant exporter.
Idiot. California's central valley is one of the hottest places on earth, and it is also some of the most productive farmland on earth.

"You can't grow corn in permafrost." - Uba

But you have repeatedly claimed that you will grow corn on the barren exposed rock of the Canadian Shield.

Idiot.
Idiot. There's lots of arable soil in Canada, now. Warming will only increase the available acreage and yields.

Idiot.

You can't grow squat on the barren exposed rock of the Canadian Shield.
Misdirection. There's lots of arable land in Canada.

And, the Canadian Shield itself supports vast forest which are currently logged.

deepsand
2.9 / 5 (21) Apr 14, 2013
There's little arable land in Canada that's not already in use.

Believing that any Canadian gain will offset the losses elsewhere is stupid.
ubavontuba
1.4 / 5 (18) Apr 14, 2013
There's little arable land in Canada that's not already in use.
Of course, as much of Canada is permafrost. But a warmer climate would provide more arable land, and increase yields.

Believing that any Canadian gain will offset the losses elsewhere is stupid.
What losses?

Mike_Massen
3.7 / 5 (15) Apr 14, 2013
ubavontuba lumbered yet again
There's little arable land in Canada that's not already in use.
Of course, as much of Canada is permafrost. But a warmer climate would provide more arable land, and increase yields.

Believing that any Canadian gain will offset the losses elsewhere is stupid.
What losses?

Food science you ignorant plebe.

Plants are dynamic, they will shift their equilibrium, more energy means more power to protect and that also comes with CO2, such as generating cyanides so there is resistance to eating them.

The consequences longer term is more land needed for other food crops, prices are already going up in general terms worldwide - why - the answer is obvious to those that can think of consequences and combinatorial complexity.
ubavontuba
1.5 / 5 (17) Apr 14, 2013
ubavontuba lumbered yet again
This appears to be your shtick.

Food science you ignorant plebe.
Of which you obviously know next to nothing.

Plants are dynamic, they will shift their equilibrium, more energy means more power to protect and that also comes with CO2, such as generating cyanides so there is resistance to eating them.
So maybe you think animals, and particularly humans, aren't also "dynamic?"

The consequences longer term is more land needed for other food crops,
Which is exactly what warming would provide.

prices are already going up in general terms worldwide - why - the answer is obvious to those that can think of consequences and combinatorial complexity.
Idiot. Food costs, as a percentage of income, are generally lower now then they've ever been in the history of mankind.

deepsand
2.8 / 5 (20) Apr 14, 2013
There's little arable land in Canada that's not already in use.
Of course, as much of Canada is permafrost. But a warmer climate would provide more arable land, and increase yields.

Believing that any Canadian gain will offset the losses elsewhere is stupid.
What losses?

The degree to which your stupidity is impenetrable is astounding.
Howhot
4.3 / 5 (12) Apr 14, 2013
... Fact is, as global warming continues to worsen unchecked, events like the 2012 heatwave and the mid-american droughts can only become more common and wide spread.

LOL. Here, you're only arguing against the assertions in the article. So are you now saying climatologists don't know what they're doing?

Did you read the entire article, or just the title? About two thirds into the article, and it says;

"This was natural variability exacerbated by global warming," Trenberth said in an email. "That is true of all such events from the Russian heat wave of 2010, to the drought and heat waves in Australia."

Your fooling yourself though if you don't think that global warming has an effect on droughts, their strengths and durance. Shifting climates from global warming mean shifting weather patterns including droughts. So, if your surprised by my dismissal of this one study, it's only from it's lack of big picture climate trends.
Howhot
4.1 / 5 (10) Apr 14, 2013
ubbatubba says something odd again;
Idiot. Food costs, as a percentage of income, are generally lower now then they've ever been in the history of mankind.

Forget that, what seniors want to know is what are the cat food costs? How much will cat food cost with increasing global warming effecting the farm industries.

Anyway about the Mt. Mona Loa measurements, I'm sure ubbatubba has never heard of the word calibration? I suspect not. There is a very very easy way to tell if CO2 is volcanic or released from fossil fuel. Just check the isotopic ratio of C14. If you sample is volcanic it should have more C14. If it's Fossil fuel, it should have less. So your claim on Mt. Mona Loa is bogus just like almost every other claim you make is.



ubavontuba
1.3 / 5 (16) Apr 15, 2013
The degree to which your stupidity is impenetrable is astounding.
"When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser." - Socrates

Ergo, deepsand = loser.

ubavontuba
1.3 / 5 (15) Apr 15, 2013
Did you read the entire article, or just the title? About two thirds into the article, and it says;

"This was natural variability exacerbated by global warming," Trenberth said in an email. "That is true of all such events from the Russian heat wave of 2010, to the drought and heat waves in Australia."
Idiot. That was one, known, raving AGWite scientist disagreeing with "dozens of scientists from five different federal agencies."

Your fooling yourself though if you don't think that global warming has an effect on droughts, their strengths and durance. Shifting climates from global warming mean shifting weather patterns including droughts. So, if your surprised by my dismissal of this one study, it's only from it's lack of big picture climate trends.
Idiot. There is no proof AGW has had any significant effect on drought. In fact, much of the world is greening.

ubavontuba
1.3 / 5 (14) Apr 15, 2013
Forget that, what seniors want to know is what are the cat food costs? How much will cat food cost with increasing global warming effecting the farm industries.
Moron. If seniors are eating cat food, it's because they're foolish, not poor. In America, food is available to anyone just for the asking. There are all sorts of free and low cost food assistance programs - both government and private.

Anyway about the Mt. Mona Loa measurements, I'm sure ubbatubba has never heard of the word calibration? I suspect not. There is a very very easy way to tell if CO2 is volcanic or released from fossil fuel. Just check the isotopic ratio of C14. If you sample is volcanic it should have more C14. If it's Fossil fuel, it should have less.
Idiot. My reference was in regards to the record being reliable. Even thermodynamics understood this.

So your claim on Mt. Mona Loa is bogus just like almost every other claim you make is.
So you're saying it's unreliable? Really?

Howhot
4.4 / 5 (7) Apr 15, 2013
Ok, ignoring cat food, @ubbatubba says something like;
Idiot. My reference was in regards to the record being reliable. Even thermodynamics understood this.

I'll let thermo argue for himself. If you think the measurements are suspect, I think you should take it up with the scientist taking the measurements. I think they will tell you exactly what I think... Your full of it dude.

You have to do a reality check if you think that somehow calibrated CO2 levels are off for an Island in the middle of the Oacific is due to activity from an active volcano 100s of miles away. And yet, their measurements agree with every other ground station across the globe! CO2 is at 396.8 (ppm) and climbing. The year before it was 393.5... etc. Global average temps for February was one of top 10 highest ever recorded. Cause; CO2. Effect: Temperature.

deepsand
2.6 / 5 (17) Apr 15, 2013
The degree to which your stupidity is impenetrable is astounding.
"When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser." - Socrates

"When the debate is lost, sophistry becomes the tool of the loser." - deepsand.

Ergo, UTube = loser.
deepsand
2.5 / 5 (16) Apr 15, 2013
Forget that, what seniors want to know is what are the cat food costs? How much will cat food cost with increasing global warming effecting the farm industries.
Moron. If seniors are eating cat food, it's because they're foolish, not poor. In America, food is available to anyone just for the asking. There are all sorts of free and low cost food assistance programs - both government and private.

You're not of or long on this planet, are you.
ubavontuba
1 / 5 (10) Apr 16, 2013
If you think the measurements are suspect, I think you should take it up with the scientist taking the measurements. I think they will tell you exactly what I think... Your full of it dude.
So by agreeing with their methodology, they're going to tell me I'm wrong (consequently saying they're wrong)? I doubt that.

You have to do a reality check if you think that somehow calibrated CO2 levels are off for an Island in the middle of the Oacific is due to activity from an active volcano 100s of miles away.
What don't you understand about them actually being on the volcano?

cont...

ubavontuba
1 / 5 (11) Apr 16, 2013
And yet, their measurements agree with every other ground station across the globe!
It's funny you couldn't reference them.

CO2 is at 396.8 (ppm) and climbing. The year before it was 393.5... etc. Global average temps for February was one of top 10 highest ever recorded.
Which only means it's cooler than it's been.

Cause; CO2. Effect: Temperature.
It's funny CO2 keeps rising, but temperatures are falling. How does that work for your cause and effect?

ubavontuba
1 / 5 (11) Apr 16, 2013
"When the debate is lost, sophistry becomes the tool of the loser." - deepsand.

Ergo, UTube = loser.
More slander. What's the matter, are the facts just not cooperating?

"When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser." -Socrates

Ergo, deepsand = loser.

ubavontuba
1 / 5 (11) Apr 16, 2013
You're not of or long on this planet, are you.
Earth, born and raised. And I've been here long enough to look around.

But your query/statement is rather bizarre. Perhaps you think you're from somewhere else?

deepsand
2.5 / 5 (16) Apr 16, 2013
"When the debate is lost, sophistry becomes the tool of the loser." - deepsand.

Ergo, UTube = loser.
More slander. What's the matter, are the facts just not cooperating?

"When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser." -Socrates

Ergo, deepsand = loser.

Just following your lead. If you don't like it, don't do it.
deepsand
2.5 / 5 (16) Apr 16, 2013
It's funny CO2 keeps rising, but temperatures are falling.

Patently false.

How does that work for your cause and effect?

If you understood how a multivariate function works you wouldn't be asking the question.
deepsand
2.5 / 5 (16) Apr 16, 2013
You're not of or long on this planet, are you.
Earth, born and raised. And I've been here long enough to look around.

But your query/statement is rather bizarre. Perhaps you think you're from somewhere else?

Apparently English isn't your first language either.


ubavontuba
1 / 5 (10) Apr 16, 2013
Just following your lead. If you don't like it, don't do it.
If you were following my lead, your arguments would be supportable. It's that you can't support your arguments that drives you to slander.

deepsand
2.1 / 5 (15) Apr 16, 2013
It's that you can't support your arguments that drives you to slander.

Precisely what you do when you're not evading by misdirection and outright lies.
ubavontuba
1.4 / 5 (11) Apr 16, 2013
It's funny CO2 keeps rising, but temperatures are falling.
Patently false.
Did you not bother to look at the references?

How does that work for your cause and effect?
If you understood how a multivariate function works you wouldn't be asking the question.
Oh, so now it's suddenly "multvariate?" It isn't just about CO2 all of a sudden?

Gosh, if CO2 isn't the primary driver of global temperatures, what is?

LOL!

deepsand
2.5 / 5 (16) Apr 16, 2013
Oh, so now it's suddenly "multvariate?" It isn't just about CO2 all of a sudden?

Who said that it was not multivariate?

Gosh, if CO2 isn't the primary driver of global temperatures, what is?

Being a primary input variable does not mean that the output of the function in question necessarily tracks that variable to the exclusion of all others.

You are either now being disingenuous or are incredibly obtuse.
ubavontuba
1 / 5 (11) Apr 16, 2013
You're not of or long on this planet, are you.
Earth, born and raised. And I've been here long enough to look around.

But your query/statement is rather bizarre. Perhaps you think you're from somewhere else?
Apparently English isn't your first language either.
Your phraseology implies English is not your first language, and you suspect it is not my first language, as well. You would be wrong.

ubavontuba
1 / 5 (10) Apr 16, 2013
It's that you can't support your arguments that drives you to slander.
Precisely what you do when you're not evading by misdirection and outright lies.
I do not employ either tactic, but you seem intimately familiar with them. And asserting I do is just more slander.

ubavontuba
1 / 5 (11) Apr 16, 2013
Oh, so now it's suddenly "multivariate?" It isn't just about CO2 all of a sudden?
Who said that it was not multivariate?
Misdirection.

Or maybe it's now your assertion that the AGWite stance isn't that CO2 is the primary variable affecting global climate change?

Gosh, if CO2 isn't the primary driver of global temperatures, what is?
Being a primary input variable does not mean that the output of the function in question necessarily tracks that variable to the exclusion of all others.
Then I will rephrase the question: What is/are the other variable/s that has/have subverted the CO2 warming signal?

You are either now being disingenuous or are incredibly obtuse.
Obviously, this seems to be your problem, as you are intentionally avoiding the questions.

deepsand
2.6 / 5 (17) Apr 17, 2013
No, UTube, I am not going to play your game of sophistry.

Either you do or do not understand what a multivariate function is, and that climate is a system described by such.

If you do know, then your questions are disingenuous. If you do not, then you are not qualified to opine on the subject and are just posturing.
Howhot
4.3 / 5 (8) Apr 17, 2013
The @Utube says;
It's funny CO2 keeps rising, but temperatures are falling.

You know Ub, I don't know how much the Minions of the anti-environmental industries are paying you but at what point do you feel any shame?


ubavontuba
1 / 5 (12) Apr 21, 2013
No, UTube, I am not going to play your game of sophistry.
It seems gamesmanship is your ploy.

Either you do or do not understand what a multivariate function is, and that climate is a system described by such.
All I'm asking is what you contend the other significant variables are. That there are other significant variables is your claim, isn't it?

If you do know, then your questions are disingenuous. If you do not, then you are not qualified to opine on the subject and are just posturing.
If CO2 is the primary driver, why isn't it continuing to warm?

ubavontuba
1 / 5 (12) Apr 21, 2013
The @Utube says;
It's funny CO2 keeps rising, but temperatures are falling.

You know Ub, I don't know how much the Minions of the anti-environmental industries are paying you but at what point do you feel any shame?
When science is ignored in favor of consensus.

So, is there anyone willng to pay me for my opinion? Feel free to PM me.

Maggnus
4.4 / 5 (7) Apr 22, 2013
When science is ignored in favor of consensus.


So better to pretend it doesn't exist and argue that any proof contrary to that pretense is the result of conspiracy. That makes more sense uba.
deepsand
2.3 / 5 (15) Apr 22, 2013
"" Either you do or do not understand what a multivariate function is, and that climate is a system described by such. "

All I'm asking is what you contend the other significant variables are. That there are other significant variables is your claim, isn't it?"

""If you do know, then your questions are disingenuous. If you do not, then you are not qualified to opine on the subject and are just posturing. "

If CO2 is the primary driver, why isn't it continuing to warm?"

Asked and answered.

Really freshman grade sophistry, UTube.
ubavontuba
1 / 5 (10) Apr 22, 2013
When science is ignored in favor of consensus.


So better to pretend it doesn't exist and argue that any proof contrary to that pretense is the result of conspiracy. That makes more sense uba.
What exists? What proof to the contrary?

The proof is there's been no global warming for more than a dozen years:

http://www.woodfo...01/trend

ubavontuba
1 / 5 (10) Apr 22, 2013
If CO2 is the primary driver, why isn't it continuing to warm?
Asked and answered.
Where? I don't see any answers, only non-answers.

Why are you dodging?

deepsand
2.3 / 5 (15) Apr 22, 2013
"Where? I don't see any answers, only non-answers.

Why are you dodging?"

Why are you pretending to not see and understand.

Oh, wait, I get it. You really are blind and stupid.
ubavontuba
1 / 5 (9) Apr 22, 2013
Where? I don't see any answers, only non-answers.

Why are you dodging?
Why are you pretending to not see and understand.

Oh, wait, I get it. You really are blind and stupid.
More dodging and non-answers. Is this all you have? Don't you claim science is on your side? Where's your science?

deepsand
2.3 / 5 (15) Apr 22, 2013
Your stupidity, UTube, feigned or real, has grown tiresome.

You'll need to find another with which to play your silly games.

All you'll get from me is ridicule and scorn.

deepsand
2.3 / 5 (15) Apr 22, 2013
UTube's favorite game is "But, why, Daddy, why?"

The foolish child needs a good spanking to teach him to shut up and go to bed..
ubavontuba
1 / 5 (11) Apr 22, 2013
Your stupidity, UTube, feigned or real, has grown tiresome.

You'll need to find another with which to play your silly games.

All you'll get from me is ridicule and scorn.
Of course, because that's all you have. LOL

"When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser." - Socrates

Ergo: deepsand = loser.
ubavontuba
1 / 5 (11) Apr 22, 2013
UTube's favorite game is "But, why, Daddy, why?"

The foolish child needs a good spanking to teach him to shut up and go to bed.
So mature (not).

How old are you? ...twelve?

deepsand
2.3 / 5 (15) Apr 22, 2013
"When the debate is lost, sophistry becomes the tool of the loser." - deepsand

Ergo: ubavontuba = loser

Grow up, kid, if you want to play with us adults.
ubavontuba
1 / 5 (11) Apr 22, 2013
"When the debate is lost, sophistry becomes the tool of the loser." - deepsand


Deepsand refuses to provide any science to back any of his assertions. I, on the other hand, regularly provide supporting science. Ergo: deepsand is the sophist loser. LOL.

Nice call there, deepsand. LOL

deepsand
2.3 / 5 (15) Apr 22, 2013
UTube's usual juvenile retort.
ubavontuba
1 / 5 (11) Apr 22, 2013
UTube's usual juvenile retort.
deepsand has no argument to make, yet he keeps typing!

Deepsand concedes by default.
Howhot
4.4 / 5 (7) Apr 22, 2013
The naked and mighty Ubbatubba says "Deepsand refuses to provide any science to back any of his assertions. I, on the other hand, regularly provide supporting science. Ergo: deepsand is the sophist loser. LOL." Haha! I see it as just the opposite; the Ubb seems to be the one who refuses to provide any science to back his assertions. So, his tactic seems to be, poison the well. It looked good there for a while ubb but I think deep has you over the barrel on this one.

Just admit it Ubb, your wrong, you have been wrong and your leading people to follow the wrong crap that amounts to fiction and lies.
deepsand
2.1 / 5 (14) Apr 23, 2013
UTube's usual juvenile retort.
deepsand has no argument to make, yet he keeps typing!

Deepsand concedes by default.

In your dreams, kid.
ubavontuba
1.1 / 5 (10) Apr 28, 2013
The naked and mighty Ubbatubba says "Deepsand refuses to provide any science to back any of his assertions. I, on the other hand, regularly provide supporting science. Ergo: deepsand is the sophist loser. LOL." Haha! I see it as just the opposite; the Ubb seems to be the one who refuses to provide any science to back his assertions. So, his tactic seems to be, poison the well. It looked good there for a while ubb but I think deep has you over the barrel on this one.
You might want to rethink who has whom over that barrel. LOL. On this page alone, I provided 4 supporting references. Deepsand provided zero.

Just admit it Ubb, your wrong, you have been wrong and your leading people to follow the wrong crap that amounts to fiction and lies.
Do you even know the definition of "fiction?" How is it fiction when the science supports my assertions, and not deepsand's or yours? Even your own reference mirrored mine!

Howhot = writer of fiction.

deepsand
2.1 / 5 (14) Apr 28, 2013
UTube lives in a fantasy world where his unsubstantiated opinions are the equal of better than facts.
ubavontuba
1 / 5 (9) Apr 28, 2013
UTube lives in a fantasy world where his unsubstantiated opinions are the equal of better than facts.
...says the science denier. LOL
deepsand
2.1 / 5 (14) Apr 28, 2013
Continuing to trot out the same old cherry-picked data, UTube, data that does not even support your position, serves no purpose.

A lie, no matter how often you repeat it, remains a lie.

Your pointless repetition is egregiously juvenile.

Grow up.
ubavontuba
1 / 5 (10) Apr 28, 2013
Continuing to trot out the same old cherry-picked data, UTube, data that does not even support your position, serves no purpose.
Assertions without supporting data are meaningless.

A lie, no matter how often you repeat it, remains a lie.
So why do you do that?

Your pointless repetition is egregiously juvenile.
...and, so why do you do that?

Grow up.
Yes, why don't you?

deepsand
2.4 / 5 (14) Apr 29, 2013
Continuing to trot out the same old cherry-picked data, UTube, data that does not even support your position, serves no purpose.
Assertions without supporting data are meaningless.

Then why do you persist in doing just that?
ubavontuba
1 / 5 (11) Apr 29, 2013
Continuing to trot out the same old cherry-picked data, UTube, data that does not even support your position, serves no purpose.
Assertions without supporting data are meaningless.

Then why do you persist in doing just that?
This is your shtick.

Are you ready to admit the world has been cooling for more than a dozen years (even using the manipulated data which is currently in vogue)?

http://www.woodfo...01/trend

deepsand
2 / 5 (12) Apr 30, 2013
Continuing to trot out the same old cherry-picked data, UTube, data that does not even support your position, serves no purpose.
Assertions without supporting data are meaningless.

Then why do you persist in doing just that?
This is your shtick.

Are you ready to admit the world has been cooling for more than a dozen years (even using the manipulated data which is currently in vogue)?

http://www.woodfo...01/trend

"No, Global Warming Has NOT Stopped"

http://www.slate....vid.html
ubavontuba
1 / 5 (10) Apr 30, 2013
Continuing to trot out the same old cherry-picked data, UTube, data that does not even support your position, serves no purpose.
Assertions without supporting data are meaningless.
Then why do you persist in doing just that?
This is your shtick.

Are you ready to admit the world has been cooling for more than a dozen years (even using the manipulated data which is currently in vogue)?

http://www.woodfo...01/trend
"No, Global Warming Has NOT Stopped"

http://www.slate....vid.html
LOL A blog opinion piece written by an astronomer, who doesn't even deny the temperature trend has fallen flat, is the best climate "science" you could muster? LOL

http://english.ru...-expect/

deepsand
2 / 5 (12) Apr 30, 2013
Unable to comprehend the article, UTube resorts to attacking the author, who he knows absolutely nothing about, and the forum in which published.

How very "scientific" of him. :rolleyes: