'Missing heat' discovery prompts new estimate of global warming

'Missing heat' discovery prompts new estimate of global warming
Credit: University of York

An interdisciplinary team of researchers say they have found 'missing heat' in the climate system, casting doubt on suggestions that global warming has slowed or stopped over the past decade.

Observational data on which climate records are based cover only 84 per cent of the planet – with Polar regions and parts of Africa largely excluded.

Now Dr Kevin Cowtan, a computational scientist at the University of York, and Robert Way, a cryosphere specialist and PhD student at the University of Ottawa, have reconstructed the 'missing' global temperatures using a combination of observations from satellites and surface data from weather stations and ships on the peripheries of the unsampled regions.

The new research published in the Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society shows that the Arctic is warming at about eight times the pace of the rest of the planet. Previous studies by the UK Met Office based on the HadCRUT4 dataset, which only covers about five-sixths of the globe, suggest that global warming has slowed substantially since 1997. The new research suggests, however, that the addition of the 'missing' data indicates that the rate of warming since 1997 has been two and a half times greater than shown in the Met Office studies. Evidence for the rapid warming of the Arctic includes observations from high latitude , radiosonde and satellite observations of temperatures in the lower atmosphere and reanalysis of historical data.

A member of the Department of Chemistry at York, Dr Cowtan, whose speciality is crystallography, carried out the research in his spare time. This is his first climate paper.

He says: "There's a perception that global warming has stopped but, in fact, our data suggests otherwise. But the reality is that 16 years is too short a period to draw a reliable conclusion. We find only weak evidence of any change in the rate of ." Robert Way adds: "Changes in Arctic sea ice and glaciers over the past decade clearly support the results of our study. By producing a truly global temperature record, we aim to better understand the drivers of recent climate change."


Explore further

Testing a relationship: Arctic warming and China's summer monsoon

More information: The paper 'Coverage bias in HadCRUT4 temperature series and its impact on recent temperature trends' is published online in the Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10 … 002/qj.2297/abstract
Provided by University of York
Citation: 'Missing heat' discovery prompts new estimate of global warming (2013, November 13) retrieved 22 May 2019 from https://phys.org/news/2013-11-discovery-prompts-global.html
This document is subject to copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no part may be reproduced without the written permission. The content is provided for information purposes only.
0 shares

Feedback to editors

User comments

Nov 13, 2013
settled science?

Nov 13, 2013
This comment has been removed by a moderator.

Nov 13, 2013
This comment has been removed by a moderator.

Nov 13, 2013
settled science?


In that temps are rising, yes. And in what is doing it, again yes.

The details of how the climate system is distributing heat around the planet are not settled. However the warming is the sum of those details and that must equal the temperature that the Earth must rise to overcome the back-radiated IR that CO2 necessarily causes. The basic equation is Solar in - IR out. The +ve value left over is AGW.

BTW: That the Arctic is warming fastest is no surprise either in theory or physical observation. It is just not properly quantified in terms of temperature away from the peripheries.

Nov 13, 2013
settled science?


It's settled science that human beings have a consciousness and are intelligent and capable of abstract reasoning and posting to the internet. We have a glimmer of understanding as to how all that ACTUALLY works inside our brains, but we know it does...


Nov 13, 2013
based on the HadCRUT4 dataset, which only covers about five-sixths of the globe,


As has been pointed out again and again in these pages and elsewhere to a certain denialist who posts the data over and over. Isn't that a surprise!

Zephyr, no one remembers your "theory" because it is straight up bs.

Nov 13, 2013
..'Missing heat' discovery prompts new estimate of global warming...
I presume, someone still remembers my theory of global warming, induced with decay of readioactive elements, accelerated with dark matter and neutrinos...


I hate to feed him BUT....

How long have raidoactive elements been around? How long has dark matter been around? Neutrinos? Why isn't the Earth a molten mass of lava floating in space?

Nov 13, 2013
It's settled science that human beings have a consciousness
Right off the bat youre wrong. There is no consciousness.
http://www.ted.co...ess.html

-And dennett is talking as a scientist, not an idiot philo.

Nov 13, 2013
Right off the bat youre wrong. There is no consciousness.


Interesting opinion. Thanks for sharing it unconsciously.

Nov 13, 2013
They jumped another shark, tacking oranges onto apples.

Notice the hilarious psychological projection of a textbook troll, meaning someone merely posting to upset others, labeling those of us who post debate points and data plots, as being trolls. As they deny natural climate change they hurl the epithet (Holocaust) "denier." Lately, not getting a rise out of my seasoned New York City vibe which merely sidesteps such poo flinging lunatics who scream about everybody else being crazy, they have resorted to massive smoke screen campaigns that are so juvenile that it represents a massive public image advantage for skepticism.

This paper claims that satellite data, spliced into isolated regions, doubles real average global warming, all the while the actual satellites themselves show little recent warming, the two data sets being plotted here:
http://www.woodfo...rom:1997

Their own satellite data sets falsify their recent spike!

Nov 13, 2013
Climatology cult scammers forge hockey sticks by splicing ("Mike's Nature Trick") real decadally sensitive thermometer data into decadally insensitive temperature proxy data after *deleting* proxy-falsifying contemporary downturns. They use the systematic mismatch between (relative) pencil straight tide gauge data and (absolute) pencil straight satellite altimetry data to publicly claim a recent surge in the rate of sea level rise.

These things they do? These things they do are lies.

Witness how NASA's own web site to this day *deletes* recent tide gauge data:
http://climate.na...dicators

They even call a *virtual* sea level plot "sea level" by following a study that added water in dams and reservoirs to the real sea level to obtain their upcurving tide gauge data, whereas the actual on-the-ground data plot shows no such trend change:
http://s22.postim..._Two.jpg

Nov 13, 2013
So not deep oceans. The Arctic has it. Is that these guys' final answer or will we be told it is inside the Hollow Earth with the Nephilim tomorrow?

Nov 13, 2013
Witness the literal Hockey Stick Team PR firm spin this twisted apples/oranges Frankenstein science that represents massive historical revisionism into just another everyday advance:
http://www.realcl...by-half/

"The public debate about the alleged "warming pause" was misguided from the outset, because far too much was read into a cherry-picked short-term trend. Now this debate has become completely baseless...."

YET THEIR NEW DATA SET IS THE BIGGEST OUTLIER OF ALL, and dozens of quotes from frantic climatologists show that their "media analysis" of layperson perception left out climatologists themselves.

Their web site administrative contact info points to the EMS division of Fenton Communications, the notorious PR firm behind anti-vaccine campaigns and the junk science breast implant scare that bankrupted Dow Corning:
http://whois.doma...mate.org

Nov 13, 2013
"The five-year mean global temperature has been flat for the last decade, which we interpret as a combination of natural variability and a slow down in the growth rate of net climate forcing." - Jim Hansen, 2012

But! The sudden update of HADCRUT3 to the HADCRUT4 historical revisionism somewhat saved retiree Hansen....
http://www.woodfo...rom:2000

WHOAH!

Nov 13, 2013
Oh, I lack simple motivation in defending the reputation of my still local Columbia University alma mater, the Colossus On The Hudson...it's "underlying" motivation at work, don't you see.

Not only that but the world's most notorious real troll has migrated to Phys.org as a death threat flinging shock jock, and dozens of sockpuppet accounts and fake account ratings bots join trained Gorebots here. A hundred million dollar a year literal PR firm designed Astroturf campaign tried to apply established old school Astroturf campaign tactics to this here new fangled Internet thingamabobby, but it done backfired, boss! Now the main clearinghouse skeptical site, WattsUpWithThat.com has this very year bursted in readership into the mainstream, literally doubling:
http://www.alexa....that.com

It's the lack of substance of online Astroturfing campaigns that fail The Man.

Nov 13, 2013
"The polar bears are drowning". - Al Gore, democrat, inventor of the Internet, counter of chads.
"The polar bears will be fine". - Freeman Dyson, smartest man never to receive the Nobel prize.

Who ya gonna believe?

Nov 13, 2013
My motivation is indeed complex, but it is *not* financial nor tribal, so those with financial and/or very tribal "motivations" cannot divine it.

My old lab mate who served as Columbia's chemistry department chairman is Colin Nuckolls, overall, by now, old school, raw science genius:
http://www.google...XK6rb47g

He is a forerunner in attaching macroscopic multimeter leads to single junction nanotube gaps.

Primitive, granted.

We just want George Jetson to really fly.

Nov 13, 2013
We want stuff to work.

Nov 13, 2013

Your grubby end of the planet, has more dirty people, dumping more dirty shit in the air, from all their dirty power stations, fires, internal combustion engines, and cookers, and this dirty shit lands on the snow and makes it black and dirty so it absorbs more heat and melts way faster, instead of reflecting the heat back into space.

Global Warming Advocates and Denialists - my gay arsehole.

Your all idiots.

Nov 13, 2013
I think you meant to say "You're all idiots."

Nov 13, 2013
The Scat Frat.

Nov 13, 2013
Via convicted online gambling money FRAUD CONVICTED DeSmogBlog supported greenie PR firm published book:

"Someone who is highly trained in rhetoric can argue any question from any angle." – J. Hoggan ("Climate Cover-Up", 2009)

"Spin is to public relations what manipulation is to interpersonal communications." – J. Hoggan ("Climate Cover-Up", 2009)

"Lies are darned handy when the truth is something you dare not admit." – J. Hoggan ("Climate Cover-Up", 2009)

"There was 100% consensus that global warming was not caused by natural climate variations." – J. Hoggan ("Climate Cover-Up", 2009)

"You will be consuming a steady diet stories that suggest that some aspects of climate science are still in doubt." – J. Hoggan ("Climate Cover-Up", 2009)

"You should be hypervigilant." – J. Hoggan ("Climate Cover-Up", 2009)

"Join the neighborhood watch of those who people who no longer stand for disinformation to be passed around your social circle." – J. Hoggan ("Climate Cover-Up", 2009)

Nov 13, 2013
"eric_in_chicago
All studies and conclusions stating that Global Warming is true are false...All studies and conclusions stating that Global Warming is true are false...All studies and conclusions stating that Global Warming is true are false...All studies and conclusions stating that Global Warming is true are false...All studies and conclusions stating that Global Warming is true are false..............................................."

I and other Neandertrolls (we will survive climate change the same way Neanderthals didn't) will now use your insightful and exquisitely reasoned rebuttal to this amazingly ill informed piece, bravo , expect it to show up on wattsupwithtwat repeatedly

omater out

Nov 13, 2013
"settled science?" - Orti

Yup. There isn't a single person in the field who doesn't know that omitting the poles, as Hadcrut does, produces a cold biased global average, since it is well known that the poles are warming faster than the rest of the globe.

Now fools and Liars like UbVonTard, are caught chronically using the earlier Hadcrut series in order to maximize the cold bias in those temperature series, and then cherry pick within that biased set to find the greatest cooling subperiods possible, then dishonestly presenting them as a real, valid trend.

UbvonTard and the others have been told about these problems with the Hadcrut series dozens upon dozens of times, and yet they persist in repeating their lies.

Sorry Charlie... The science is settled.

Nov 13, 2013
Now, as to the Hadcrut series themselves, there is absolutely nothing wrong with them.

They are a measure like any other, and have utility where appropriate.

They are not a good measure of global temperature since they aren't global, and make no attempt to be global.

They are, however, an excellent measure of the region of the globe that they do measure.

The failure of Chronic Liars like UbVonTard, is in his chronic and dishonest misrepresentation of the HadCrut series.


Nov 13, 2013
"The dark matter affects the thermal balance of Earth " - Walters1

Yes, but the magic pixie dust left over from Disney movies is counteracting the invisible, undetected, nothingness that you claim is heating the planet and which must be magically preventing CO2 from warming it by exactly the same amount.

Amazing stuff that dark matter.

By the way... Why isn't it also warming the sun?


Nov 13, 2013
Well, it didn't take long for the denier idiots to show up on the scene. I'm sure the people in The Phillipines agree with them.

Nov 13, 2013
Drum roll and a crescendo of a double dozen glorious trumpets as The Brain does explain his newly minted plan to Pinky:

"A member of the Department of Chemistry at York, Dr Cowtan, whose speciality is crystallography, carried out the research in his spare time. This is his first climate paper."

http://www.charac...rain.jpg

...yet RealClimate.org spins it as the now only valid temperature record. How did this crystallographer double global warming with only 16% of the planet? Ah, they were afforded a massive cherry pick of the arctic, it seems, even though full use of satellite data falsifies their global average result. The UAH satellite does show a burst in arctic warming:
http://s6.postimg...mage.jpg

What they don't mention in the RealClimate.org smack down is how the massive Antarctic continent that contains a whopping 90% of all ice is itself heading down in defiance of theory!

Nov 14, 2013
The science is settled as this pause of 2011, before the 2012 HADCRUT update from The CRU University of Climategate:
http://www.woodfo.../mean:12

...turns into this spike of 2013:
http://cdn.physor...eatd.png

Magically, by a crystallographer!

Phil "Hide The Decline" Jones of the CRU is now a Saudi petrodollar prince in the making:
http://mpc.kau.ed...nes.aspx

...as Al Gore rants on about Big Oil money after Kuwait gave him half a *billion* dollars for his Global Warming cable TV channel.

The cult is thinning but the bitter enders are doubling down as concealed statistical fraud no longer gives them their desired extra warming. Alas for them the MET Office itself has just severely *downgraded* their former hot, hot, hot projections:
http://tallbloke....orecast/

But it's *already* hotter than their projection, says RealClimate!

Nov 14, 2013
Wow, the Activity tab of commenters here shows that both Al_Gore and Michael_Moore are reading along here! I'm honored. Hi, Mike. Hi Al. It's amazing how both of you comment so fast at odd hours. And you sure are fond of Mr. Sinister.

But do you really afford five stars to "denier idiots" and shameless ambulance chasing bullshit that relies on converting peek wind gusts from Metric to English without changing the number itself and neglects that reality matches real theory that warming reduces instead of intensifies cyclones, tornadoes, hurricanes, twisters and lil' dirt devils? After all, Vice President, poor Obama has suffered the fewest hurricanes of any president, right?

Berkeley physicist Richard Muller chimes in, Al:
"Intense storms have not increased! They have not increased."

Muller: "The standards held over there at the University of East Anglia are just not up to what we consider standard scientific methods…."

Al? Why do you own a jet ski? Do you respect your *own* fans?

Nov 14, 2013
Their included video demonstrates Larry, Curly and Moe science:
(1) Leave out the Arctic.
(2) Smear Siberia over the Arctic.
(3) Frankenstein monster of satellites only in the Arctic!

Woop! Szzzzdattle. Bong!

Hey what about (4)?

(4) Satellites everywhere.

Oh, that supports skepticism so well that those who run the satellite data set are themselves very outspoken skeptics! Roy Spenser and John Christy are not mere CrYsTaLographers.

In all seriousness, this isn't so much fraud as just junk science, since their own satellite input data falsifies their conclusion...and *yet* it passed peer review in the magical crystal world of Climatology.

Nov 14, 2013
I thought I had been desensitized to the global warming deniers by now, but once again I'm proven wrong. The sheer level of the craziness is pretty mindblowing. In some cases I have to wonder if there's some sort of mental illness involved; it's just hard to imagine this stuff being said by any sane, rational person.

With regards to the article, I'm really not surprised by the results. Given that the planetary radiation balance (measured from space) has remained consistently positive throughout this supposed "lull", it was obvious that all that energy had to be going somewhere. So the whole problem continues to progress more or less as expected.

Nov 14, 2013
The real monster here is aptly named Sinister, who represents those who would truly murder future cyclone victims by artificially rationing their available energy supplies from afar, quite proudly, and quite genocidally.

"Well, it didn't take long for the denier idiots to show up on the scene. I'm sure the people in The Phillipines agree with them."

History is filled with masses of such sinister people, acting out illusions, murderously. Their propaganda masters are faltering so badly that news sites have this year banned "climate change deniers" who try to post quotes from Jim Hansen:

"The five-year mean global temperature has been flat for the last decade, which we interpret as a combination of natural variability and a slow down in the growth rate of net climate forcing." - Jim Hansen, 2012

Without abundant energy how will dykes be built, hospitals be run, houses be rebuilt, bodies be buried quickly enough to avoid a plague, or airplanes be flown in with supplies, cheaply?

Nov 14, 2013
These maniacs even name themselves as evil:

(a) Vendicar(E = duplicate account when B, C, and D were death threat banned here) = Italian for revenge.

(b) Sinister

(c) axemaster

Their lack of a sense of humor makes playfulness and pun making appear to them as alien. What type of person lacks a sense of humor while spewing raw hatred? Climate Justice Jihadis from groups like eco-terroristic Earth Liberation Front who will burn down your new house? Yup!

NASA's Gavin Schmidt who nobody seems to know around here in the compact Columbia University area, is himself disgusted with these dehumanizing fanatics, seen here in a short video clip decrying the term "denier":
http://tinypic.co...&s=5

In this very thread they are hilariously fighting the statements if both Jim Hansen and his old right hand man, Gavin who still runs RealClimate.org.

Nov 14, 2013
@ Nik: There's a bright side. We've demonstrated the capability, and are now demonstrating the wherewithal, to do terraforming. Pretty sure we'll get better at it in a hurry.

@ VendicarE -- your wit kind of reminds me of a character who's half Vulcan and half Klingon: brutally logical. Please give some thought to encoding your style & expertise into an AIML agent, and then set it loose on forums large & small.

Nov 14, 2013
I've always wanted to be named as an evil maniac, now my wishes have been granted.

But seriously, the pills are in that bottle on your desk. Use them.

Nov 14, 2013
Vendicar(E)'s wit is on display in screenshots of his rabid calls for public executions of skeptics:
http://postimg.or...yk73cod/

@ Protoplasmix does offer a serious "lukewarmer" economic argument, namely that as mildly enhanced warming eventually stops being a major life and biosphere enhancing benefit, next century when technology is ridiculously advanced via bio/nano breakthroughs, a Star Trek worthy civilization can be easily expected to tweak the climate with all manner of schemes that currently remain science fiction.

Alas, current biology and chemistry graduates are having their initial careers bursts thwarted by emergency level funding diversion into the junk science of Climatology and highly premature billion dollar green boondoggles! That is a generation lost to real science.

@ axemaster: calling sincere posts of Hansen's stated pause crazy, is crazy, and crazy people do project a lot, but I doubt you're really crazy, just acting crazy under the stress of ridicule.

Nov 14, 2013
Here, Protoplasmix casually *compliments* the very definition of psychopathy ("half Vulcan and half Klingon: brutally logical") and then suggests forum spoofing as his own post supports skeptical calls for mitigation being favored over energy rationing, in agreement with the Oxford Union debating society of 2010:

"This House would put economic growth before combating climate change."

"The Union is the world's most prestigious debating society, with an unparalleled reputation for bringing international guests and speakers to Oxford. It has been established for 182 years, aiming to promote debate and discussion not just in Oxford University, but across the globe."

Nov 14, 2013
Please guys where have you been?
There is NO global warming but rather global cooling.
Study, look around, keep your eyes and ears open and think!!!
CNN is porobably the only MSN currently still talking about global warming but its obvious why..

Nov 14, 2013
In all seriousness, this isn't so much fraud as just junk science, since their own satellite input data falsifies their conclusion...and *yet* it passed peer review in the magical crystal world of Climatology.


Nik: What's junk about it? And why would you think that ignoring what temperatures are doing in the Arctic is good science? If you what to quantify fully what the Earth's climate system is doing with it's heat distribution that place needs to be included - fully.
Antarctica (for the nth time) is a world apart. Science does not expect it to respond to AGW in the same way as the rest of the globe, especially not the Arctic, which is uniquely vulnerable. The climate system is not linear - the totality of it's complicated response needs evaluation. Including ocean temperature BTW, which conveniently gets ignored in mention of a "pause" despite it's >90% storage of climatic heat. Without the Gulf stream/N Atlantic Drift the UK would have frigid winters for instance.

Nov 14, 2013
Fellow Harvard man and string theory physicist who was among the few selected for the Harvard Society of Fellows, demolishes this literal PR campaign promoted paper, here:
http://motls.blog...end.html

About the authors of this study:

"But if you click at the names above, you will learn that Cowtan is an expert in programming software that paints protein molecules while geography student Robert Way is a cryosphere kid who likes to play with the permafrost and a long-time assistant to kook John Cook at the doubly ironically named "Skeptical Science" server."

About hybrid data follies:

"One must be extremely careful about splicing data from different datasets. It's very easy to fool yourself. It seems to me that they have no control over the error margins (especially various kinds of systematic errors) that they introduced by their hybridization method."

Nov 14, 2013
Lubos scoffs:

"But what I find remarkable is the weird sociological dimension of these "findings". After years in which everyone was told that the warming trend is known with certainty etc., it may easily change by 0.5 °C per century – even in the recent decades which should provide us with the most controllable raw data. Half a Celsius degree per century is almost the whole warming trend we like to associate with the 20th century! So if a computer graphics programmer and a cryosphere kid might change the figure by 150% overnight, and Germany's most important alarmist below 50 years instantly applauds them, someone else could surely change the trend in the opposite direction and the 20th century warming would be gone, right?"

Nov 14, 2013
@runrig

Over last few decades average rainfall in extended region of Perth, Western Australia seems to be falling, which suggests the ocean evaporation to the West of that region is reduced. Well we are not far from Antarctica so it seems plausible more melt water is coming off the ice there and flowing past our western regions to reduce the average temperature.

Perhaps Antarctica is not that much a world apart from where I live as the connectedness of those positions above do seem to tally from what little I know of some of the details of the combinatorial complexity of our dynamic climate system.

Some good comments btw runrig, I enjoy your posts they are to the point and not rambling with noise as so many others who waste space and don't actually follow a dialectic with any sort of intelligence, focus *or* educative input (sigh).

Nov 14, 2013
MET Officer runrig feigns confusion: "What's junk about it?"

Yet his *own* MET office New Year's down-projections make a mockery of this extra warming result, as does a direct quote from James Hansen himself.

Then he feigns ignorance again by hitting me with a strawman argument as if I endorsed ignoring the Arctic right after I pointed out that full satellite coverage of the planet that already includes the Arctic data used in this very paper, itself shows no recent warming.

What this study ignores is the bulk of satellite data! Stated differently, they did not so much add satellite data into ground data as much as suddenly toss out and replace inconveniently cooling full globe satellite data with hyper up-adjusted ground data, leaving behind a tiny part of the globe that satellites do show is warming considerably.

Then he pretends that polar amplification theory is just fine for ignoring mildly cooling Antarctica, all the while Hockey Stick Team members and Hansen claim warming.

Nov 14, 2013
If two outspoken skeptics were *not* behind one of the satellite temperature data sets, activist re-adjustments like HADCRUT3 > HADCRUT4 would quite obviously be made to this space age fully global friend of skeptics that combined with the MET office flat projection now falsifies the core hypothesis of Climatology and the alarm that goes with it. That hypothesis was sold as the classic greenhouse effect through conscious PR firm tutored acts of raw slanderous deception that claimed that a few universally blog banned maverick greenhouse effect "slayers" represented mainstream water vapor feedback skepticism. All alarm pivots on this highly speculative supercomputer model feedback, but Gore's hundred million dollar a year PR campaign doesn't want laypeople to know this, so he trains Climate Crusaders to Astroturf the hell out of news forums with canned slander via his RealityDrop.com site in partnership with one of the very authors of this study:
http://www.skepti...team.php

Nov 14, 2013
Wow, so this really is a Team effort propaganda piece. No, the five or six existing temperature series will *not* be replaced by a twenty year old activist kid playing on his computer, but a few PR firm promoted headlines may arrive during a big political meeting on climate in Poland.

It'll be popcorn time tomorrow, assuming WattsUpWithThat.com alerts the hundreds of propellor heads over there to it, rather than just politely ignores it like they ignore new reports of the Lock Ness Monster, or Jesus appearing in rainbows.

The real Climatology meltdown is abruptly accelerating, what with Cook's own 97% consensus fiasco and subsequent rejected paper, Lew's crazy blog survey only of alarmist activists pretending to be skeptics and Marcott's proxy re-dating hockey stick fraud. It's quite a site to behold.

-=The Skeptic Rapid Response Team=-, special Koch conspiracy agent -=NikFromNYC=-, Ph.D. (Columbia/Harvard)

Nov 14, 2013
Lubos confirms the indeed *junk* nature of this "science":

"A paradoxical feature of their conclusion is that they used the satellite data to increase the (small) warming trend seen at HadCRUT – even though the satellite data actually show a cooling trend since 1997 or 1998. That's ironic, you could say. Why wouldn't you prefer to use the satellites for the whole Earth, anyway?"

Nov 14, 2013
Watch the mindless Gorebots down this bitter Kool-Aid like it was fine wine, on the study author's own collective blog:
http://skepticals...ast.html

(1) "This result is staggering. My congratulations...."
(2) "Well done."
(3) "Very well done."
(4) "Wow. This is going to tweak a few folks who shall remain unnamed."
(5) "Interesting and ingenious approach."
(6) "Like almost everyone, I am thrilled at the novelty of this work."
(7) "The MSM is going to be all over this and they will demand an explanation from the ''skeptics''."

These Bambis are cluelessly naive that blatant junk science never ends well and that their own reputations are being thrown into the hole their literal gurus are suddenly furiously digging in the last year alone.

"The UFOs didn't land after all, but oh wait!...*yes* they did, they're just ethereal airy bodies, bathing us all around! Wonderful doomsday any day now!"

Cult breakdown in action.

Nov 14, 2013
They needed a model to learn that the Earth's "waste heat" is going to be driven a la thermodynamics, to someplace cold?

Where it will be absorbed?

I've been saying that for 30 years, and that was six years before I even learned thermo'.

So yeah, pretty settled.

Add heat to the poles and the result is no warming, but plenty of melting.

Heat and temperature people, there is a difference, even if deniers and AGW-ers don't understand it. I defy anyone to propose a mechanism where the amount of energy in the Earth has not increased due to man's influence. And the principle results has NOT been warming.

(Sadly) Yet.

If you can so much as propose one, I'll be impressed.
You'll still be wrong, but I will be impressed.

Nov 14, 2013
The biggest Team break from even the semblance of real science ironically appeared in (evidently pal review friendly) top journal Science this year, Marcott 2013 in which the input temperature proxies were re-dated to afford a temperature hockey stick:

Input data for Marcott plotted from their own supplement:
http://postimg.or...zirjyjd/

Hockey Stick Mann himself celebrating it:
http://s15.postim...2013.jpg

It was the first hoax anybody without a statistical background could easily understand since the "super hockey stick" blade is a pure data drop off artifact falsified by each and every input proxy that do not show such a sharp end spike.

Nov 14, 2013
@Alchemist: "I defy anyone to propose a mechanism where the amount of energy in the Earth has not increased due to man's influence."

A good 97% of skeptics readily accept the classic greenhouse effect (as you are WELL AWARE, you lie-of-omission, goal-post-moving propogandist). Serious skepticism, as you too well aware, is against indeed alarming positive feedback scenarios, merely.

Your proclaimed deniers of alarmism now include 48% of the American Meteorological Society members surveyed in 2012:

"Look at the views in column 1, then look at the % in the rightmost column: 52% state the the warming since 1850 is mostly anthropogenic. One common categorization would categorize the other 48% as 'deniers'." - Dr. Judith Curry ( http://judithcurr...nsensus/ )

The 97% consensus claims are utter BS, including the insane one by the blog partners of this very Frankenstein statistical paper where the bizarre boutique term "global climate change" was used as a filter.

Nov 14, 2013
They needed a model to learn that the Earth's "waste heat" is going to be driven a la thermodynamics, to someplace cold?

Where it will be absorbed?

I've been saying that for 30 years, and that was six years before I even learned thermo'.

So yeah, pretty settled.

Add heat to the poles and the result is no warming, but plenty of melting.

Heat and temperature people, there is a difference, even if deniers and AGW-ers don't understand it. I defy anyone to propose a mechanism where the amount of energy in the Earth has not increased due to man's influence. And the principle results has NOT been warming.

(Sadly) Yet.

If you can so much as propose one, I'll be impressed.
You'll still be wrong, but I will be impressed.


Sorry for the inanity. Can't control the chess playing pidgeons.

Nov 14, 2013
"An interdisciplinary team of researchers say they have found 'missing heat' in the climate system...."

Here "interdisciplinary" is smoke screen spin art for non-climatologists.

@Alchemist is here too, enjoying amateur hour, claiming that the massive *temperature* spike these kids "discovered" represents "no warming, but plenty of melting."

No wait...it's his own unpublished theory!

And dude, you just spammed the thread with a full quote of yourself, referring to your own copy as inanity.

Nov 14, 2013

This result is physically impossible.

The Arctic ocean sea surface temperatures are assumed in the records to be -1.8C in the winter (ie frozen) and warm to as much as -1.1C in the summer (ie some ice, some melt, some melt-ponds).

It cannot be +1.5C warmer than this as the authors have calculated. All the sea ice would melt out at this temperature.

Not possible given there is still a lot of sea ice in the Arctic in the summer and in the winter.

Nov 14, 2013
In the Climatology cult, just *calling* quotes by Ph.D.s "inane" makes it so!

Why? How? I'll tell you how, after years of seeing them in action. These are collectivists instead of independent mature adults, so instead of counter arguments (here, that the satellite data used itself falsifies the claimed result!), they carry out group bonding maneuvers between each other. This allows their neurotic egos to dehumanize others and afford them a righteous aire of feigned superiority over real Ph.D. commenters and academic skeptics. Instead of proactively engage in losing debates within skeptical blogs, they have formed multiple orbiting mirror blogs of WattsUpWithThat.com where they huddle to kvetch and whine about skeptics. Their whole good/evil ego boost obsessively *relies* upon skeptics as truly evil bogeymen. Note how the study author's own blog is overwhelmingly focused not on supporting evidence but on skeptics. Interesting is how the Climategate e-mails showed the *same* obsession.

Nov 14, 2013
They needed a model to learn that the Earth's "waste heat" is going to be driven a la thermodynamics, to someplace cold?

Where it will be absorbed?

I've been saying that for 30 years, and that was six years before I even learned thermo'.

So yeah, pretty settled.

Add heat to the poles and the result is no warming, but plenty of melting.

Heat and temperature people, there is a difference, even if deniers and AGW-ers don't understand it. I defy anyone to propose a mechanism where the amount of energy in the Earth has not increased due to man's influence. And the principle results has NOT been warming.

(Sadly) Yet.

If you can so much as propose one, I'll be impressed.
You'll still be wrong, but I will be impressed.

Sorry for the inanity. Can't control the chess playing pidgeons.

Nov 14, 2013
What this study ignores is the bulk of satellite data! Stated differently, they did not so much add satellite data into ground data as much as suddenly toss out and replace inconveniently cooling full globe satellite data with hyper up-adjusted ground data, leaving behind a tiny part of the globe that satellites do show is warming considerably.


What it does Nik is use a hybrid of satellite derived data and the reporting stations at the edges to come up with an estimation of temp. change. This method was used to verify it's accuracy by repeating the process over a known region after removal of it's temp data. SO you do think it's good science to ignore quantification of what's happening over 1/6th of the world that is most affected by warming?

Then he pretends that polar amplification theory is just fine for ignoring mildly cooling Antarctica, all the while Hockey Stick Team members and Hansen claim warming


Nov 14, 2013
Please provide evidence in the form of a peer-reviewed study that shows that Antarctica is "mildly warming" as I've done several times to show the reverse.

Yet his *own* MET office New Year's down-projections make a mockery of this extra warming result, as does a direct quote from James Hansen himself.


Any down projections were in the lower bound - by 0.5C I believe.
Also "quotes" from ANYONE are not science and are worthless (from either side). If you find a quote from a peer-reviewed study, then yes, that counts, otherwise no, sorry. We don't live in a world were we should take account of a person's pontifications, whether famous or knowledgeable. The only truth we can have is in the consensus science. I know you don't like it, but there is no other way. Full stop.

Nov 14, 2013

This result is physically impossible.

The Arctic ocean sea surface temperatures are assumed in the records to be -1.8C in the winter (ie frozen) and warm to as much as -1.1C in the summer (ie some ice, some melt, some melt-ponds).

It cannot be +1.5C warmer than this as the authors have calculated. All the sea ice would melt out at this temperature.

Not possible given there is still a lot of sea ice in the Arctic in the summer and in the winter.


Err, no my friend. The temperature of the surface water in the Barents, Kara, and Laptev Seas especially has been getting up to 4/5C by Aug and the anomaly similarly. That's a lot of extra energy added to the atmosphere via condensation after evaporation. And also, no, it will not "all melt out at this temp" (not yet anyway). The primary melting agent is direct solar energy or warmth of the sea beneath.

http://nsidc.org/...09/4292/

Nov 14, 2013
Here, Protoplasmix casually *compliments* the very definition of psychopathy ("half Vulcan and half Klingon: brutally logical") and then suggests forum spoofing

Hm, the very definition of psychopathy is mental illness. Are you suggesting that I was saying that biological offspring resulting from parents of different races are in some way born mentally ill? Racist much, Nik?

And forum spoofing is quite different from cloning an AIML agent. You have lots of knowledge but clearly lack understanding of it. I'd say stick to climate science, but after this insight into how your own brain is wired, I'm more inclined to suggest therapy.

Nov 14, 2013
Over last few decades average rainfall in extended region of Perth, Western Australia seems to be falling, which suggests the ocean evaporation to the West of that region is reduced. Well we are not far from Antarctica so it seems plausible more melt water is coming off the ice there and flowing past our western regions to reduce the average temperature.
Perhaps Antarctica is not that much a world apart from where I live as the connectedness of those positions above do seem to tally from what little I know of some of the details of the combinatorial complexity of our dynamic climate system.

Mike,
I've had a quick look at this and the following study, attributes the southward movement of the Antarctic polar jet-stream and consequent rise in pressure this caused to give lower rainfall. This is further matched with anthropic forcing.
http://journals.a...LI3817.1

Nov 14, 2013
runrig, as an avid data digger yourself you are well aware that the UAH temperature data is one of the most rigorously peer reviewed series in existence exactly because nervous climate scientists have been trying to poke holes in it for a decade as detailed in the record of peer reviewed critiques on the Wikipedia page for the UAH satellite. It's already fully peer reviewed and this very study relies on such standard satellite data too. You can't dismiss peer reviewed data as not being peer reviewed. So how about you post a peer reviewed study of Antarctica that uses satellite data to show real warming there?

Lets find at the official trend map of satellite data for you:
http://nsstc.uah...._alt.png

Nov 14, 2013
FOLLY CONTEST WINNER!!!

Protoplasmix PULLS THE RACE CARD in a global warming debate by invoking aliens!

Oh runrig, your buddies are a riot.

Delving into this paper there is a vast well of statistical shenanigans at work and this is just a super fudged version of activist Hansen's GISS product but in obscure fashion they actually spread coastal thermometer data more robustly across uncharted ice while only using satellite data to guide that junk science smearing. This is an amateur hour kiddie playhouse version of Steig's warming Antarctic on the very cover of Nature that skeptics demolished via peer reviewed debunking. No, tender fawns, no, no, this will *not* suddenly *falsify* even GISS and render Hansen's face red since he already officially fetrilization effect backtracked just before parting with NASA as a multimillionaire. Trees are sucking up his warming, he now admits,

Nov 14, 2013
"We suggest that the surge of fossil fuel use, mainly coal, since 2000 is a basic cause of the large increase of carbon uptake by the combined terrestrial and ocean carbon sinks. One mechanism by which fossil fuel emissions increase carbon uptake is by fertilizing the biosphere via provision of nutrients essential for tissue building, especially nitrogen, which plays a critical role in controlling net primary productivity and is limited in many ecosystems and field studies confirm a major role of nitrogen deposition, working in concert with CO2 fertilization, in causing a large increase in net primary productivity of temperate and boreal forests."

[From the last NASA paper from Jim Hansen.]

Nov 14, 2013
Speaking of psychopathy, a wonderful professional documentary on political and corporate psychopaths requires a mere logical extension to yet another destructive government scheme: Climate Alarm. It's called "I AmFish Head - Are Corporate Leaders Psychopaths?" as you can contemplate how Enron has been now dwarfed by Solyndra and other billion dollar friends, mostly now bankrupt:
http://youtu.be/Jxq7hiHi1cE

Liberals will love its Bush bashing. But *their* power hungry wonks and profiteers are all saints, you see! They prove this here by the universal debate busting nuclear level smack down: SNIDE INNUENDO!

runrig adds last minute dead thread homework, so skeptics "lose" by attrition.

The way gurus are advancing out of passive-aggressive data tampering to just grab headlines into brazen lying with freshman F grade level hoaxing, and reaching for the censorship curtain, gosh it's rather odd behavior for mere nerdy scientists, eh? "Scientist" Mann is on Twitter using #DenierForHire.

Nov 14, 2013
Speaking of nukes, head of climatology at Georgia Tech, Judith Curry explodes this paper:

On their, uh, *innovative* use of the cited "Kriging" method:
"Kriging across land/ocean/sea ice boundaries makes no physical sense. While the paper cites Rigor et al. (2000) that shows 'some' correlation in winter between land and sea ice temps at up to 1000 km, I would expect no correlation in other seasons."

Overall:
"So I don't think Cowtan and Wray's analysis adds anything to our understanding of the global surface temperature field and the 'pause.'"

Background:
"The bottom line remains Ed Hawkins' figure that compares climate model simulations for regions where the surface observations exist. This is the appropriate way to compare climate models to surface observations, and the outstanding issue is that the climate models and observations disagree."
http://curryja.fi...kins.jpg

http://judithcurr...ta-sets/

Nov 14, 2013
@ Nick: LOL, good one! I don't think I've ever had so many words put in my mouth that I didn't say. If you're trying to convince others of your position on the climate, it's an epic fail in this instance. I'm neither the first, nor likely the last, to say I see how you are.

NOM
Nov 14, 2013
@ Nick: LOL, good one! I don't think I've ever had so many words put in my mouth that I didn't say. If you're trying to convince others of your position on the climate, it's an epic fail in this instance. I'm neither the first, nor likely the last, to say I see how you are.

Careful. You'll make him get his caps-lock key stuck again.

Nov 14, 2013
Extortive tone libelous slander noted, goracle. Make it a pattern and you won't just lose debate points but possibly your no longer anonymous shirt.

Nov 14, 2013
Nik:
I have said many times that AGW theory does NOT expect any large changes in temp for Antarctica away from the peripheries. I will not go again into the geography of it but meteorologically it stems from the strong cold vortex inherent there coupled with the ozone hole which serves both to cool the upper atmosphere (strengthen vortex) and also due a lessened GHE from that lesser O3.

From wiki…
http://en.wikiped...fication]http://en.wikiped...fication[/url]
"It is not observed in the Antarctic, largely because the Southern Ocean acts as a heat sink and the lack of seasonal snow cover. It is common to see it stated that "Climate models generally predict predict amplified warming in polar regions", … However, climate models predict amplified warming for the Arctic but only modest warming for Antarctica."
http://en.wikiped...fication]http://en.wikiped...fication[/url]

http://www.mitosy...2-09.pdf

cont

Nov 14, 2013
"Mean surface temperature trends in both West and East Antarctica are positive for 1957–2006, and the mean continental warming is comparable to that for the Southern Hemisphere as a whole. This warming trend is difficult to explain without the radiative forcing associated with increasing greenhouse-gas concentrations….."

"….It is shown that significant tropospheric warming prevails during Antarctic winters and springs, but we also find significant winter cooling over half of East Antarctica. We find the largest winter tropospheric warming of about 0.6 K/decade for 1979–2005 between 120°W and 180°W…."

http://onlinelibr...abstract

broken link below ....http://en.wikiped...fication

Nov 14, 2013
runrig, I'm indeed fully aware that the rogue "science" of Climastology offers all manner of ex post facto claims that what contradicts their theory fits it just fine.

Jim Hansen's own 1988 paper that helped turn the whole Global Cooling scare into Global Warming, predicted simple theory-based North *and* South pole amplified warming the predicted 2010 temperature change map being right in his paper:
http://postimg.or...mddmktp/

[Reference: http://pubs.giss....etal.pdf ]

Today your argument that heating isn't predicted for Antarctica contradicts in spirit your additional claim that it is really hearing after all.

Nov 14, 2013
@Nik: Your effort to diminish the work of runrig with a hastily assumed association that I am one of his buddies is another indication of flawed cognitive processes, and it's an outright misrepresentation of facts. My assertion was based on terraforming and had nothing to do with the effort to quantify the amount of heat that humanity is adding to the system, or how much heat is being retained. Humanity's ability to regulate the environment of closed systems on smaller scales is plainly evident. But there are apparently no lessons in that for you, Nik, and so your assertions that human activities have an inconsequential effect on the environment of the planet, and that climatology is pseudoscience and politically motivated, carry a lot less weight.

Nov 14, 2013
@Nik: You said I advocate "Forum spoofing"? I've heard of spoofing a login prompt. My bank takes special precautions to let me know no one's spoofing their website. But forum spoofing?? What do you know about forum spoofing, Mr. Screenshot Forum Archiver? And who would want to do such a thing? For what purpose?
echo check
echo
echo
lmao

Nov 14, 2013
Replying to NikFromNYC's first post on this thread, let's modify your graph slightly by plotting linear trends:

http://www.woodfo...97/trend

Wow what do you know, global mean has distinctly positive trend where land-only mean is nearly flat horizontal. Land-only (RSS) in this case approximates the global data sans the poles, whereas the full data set (UAH) represents full coverage. Barely any trend in the former; significant trend in the latter. Basically, the same pattern as described in the above article. And you were trying to use this data to make some kind of counter-point?

Here's a small modification to the graph: just moving the starting point back from 1997 to 1987:

http://www.woodfo...87/trend

Hmmm, nearly identical trends for global vs. land-only. Again, just like in the video above. Wow, who-da-thunk... derrrrr

Nov 14, 2013
P.S.

Don't expect me to hang around and debate this here any further. Reading the exchange above, I'm strongly reminded of why I stopped bothering with the comment threads on this site in the first place. You people are mentally ill, and need to seek professional help...

And the fact that this site refuses to moderate these "discussions", thereby tacitly encouraging and endorsing your pathology, is a good reason for normal and sane people to avoid this site altogether (this time around, I only found myself back here through Google News.)

Toodles!

Nov 15, 2013
FRAUD APOLOGISTS:
"flawed cognitive process"
"caps-lock key stuck"
"inclined to suggest therapy"
"the trolls"
"underlying motivation"
"#DenierForHire"
"sheer level of the craziness"
"some sort of mental illness"
"the pills are in that bottle"
"chess playing pigeons"
"inclined to suggest therapy"

SKEPTICS:
"data don't fit no hockey stick!"
(A) http://postimg.or...zirjyjd/
(B) http://s15.postim...2013.jpg

Nov 15, 2013
Today your argument that heating isn't predicted for Antarctica contradicts in spirit your additional claim that it is really hearing after all.


That isn't what I said Nik (so again again)…

The INTERIOR of the Continent is not predicted to warm substantially. Because of the reasons I repeatedly post, often in response to you.

Try to understand that the Antarctic interior is at an AVERAGE height of 12000ft, has maximum albedo and has air in almost constant circulation over it. Air has great difficulty in penetrating into it and bring any warming from further afield. The Ozone hole (man-made) has contributed to a cooling effect.
Yet still West Antarctica and the peripheries are warming. Making for an average warming.

This paper found a cooling in the Strat and warming in the mid Trop. (both signatures of AGW). A surface trend for warming will be further masked by proximity to ice/snow ( radiative, sublimative cooling).
https://ore.exete...71/10642

Nov 15, 2013
Runrig, *all* of your "papers" come from a field of "science" that claims a 97% consensus supports the likes of my above mentioned Marcott 2013 hockey stick that any kid can *see* has no hockey stick in the fucking input data, so go fish, expert!

It don't take Sherlock
To see
Da data don't fit
Da data don't fit
No hockey stick!
Yo, bo, runrig
WattsUpWithThat?
DOT COM...

Sing it again, Al:
http://tinypic.co...&s=5

...and an after show of Hansen's follies:
http://oi52.tinyp...fktk.jpg

...where even Banksy gets a cameo:
http://oi53.tinyp...bol5.jpg

...here in outter spazzxe:
http://a2.img.mob...arge.jpg

Ground control to Major Runrig, now it's time to leave the capsule if you dare...
http://oi52.tinyp...mn83.jpg

Nov 15, 2013
"hide the decline"
"the divergence problem"
"the missing heat"
"Big Oil money"
"deniers!"
"data terrorists"
"BULLSHIT!"
"public executions"

Welcome to deba$ed liberalism, the new doomsday religious factor in politics.

Old school iconic liberal journalist Alexander "Hot" Cockburn spells it out for you kiddies, and old MET man runrig, complete with a Moore's law criticism of nuclear energy to warm your cockles:
http://www.youtub...YenWfz0Y

Nov 15, 2013
Runrig, *all* of your "papers" come from a field of "science" that claims a 97% consensus supports the likes of my above mentioned Marcott 2013 hockey stick that any kid can *see* has no hockey stick in the fucking input data, so go fish, expert!


That is of course true (97% consensus). I will continue to say that even if you cannot/will not understand the science, that is the only sensible opinion to side with. Disregarding all theories of incompetence/conspiracy by pointing to the few who contradict and calling the 97% wrong, is by any measure of probability, bizarre. And you will not do so by goading me to provide it for you, ignoring, then returning to the self-fulfilling prophesy that is reading WUWT eg. It matters not that you do – I don't seek to convince you. I'm on here to deny ignorance, where my knowledge allows – for others.

The Hockey-stick will never go away – because that's all you have. If the MWP was warmer than present then the present isn't unprecedented.

Nov 15, 2013

Cont
The fact that all peer-reviewed science rejects that, matters not a jot to you. In a sane world the minority that shouts loudest do not get to win my friend.

Now find me a causation that warms climate (air/land) that isn't the sun, isn't albedo, CFC's,CR's and isn't merely a redistribution twixt air/sea in a cycle that will play out. And that's not anthropic GHG's. Which it is.

http://en.wikiped...troversy

Also I will continue to disregard any posts that denigrate a personality because of their opinion and equally those that claim veracity because of some personality supporting it.

All that matters is the majority view. All other ways of doing things don't work. Not least because the laws of probability say so.

Like the chance of there being a greater Arctic sea-ice this year being 97% ( normal distribution ) and the fact that '10/'11, 11/'12 and 12/13 were all well beyond 2 sd's from the norm. Quite plainly the norm is quickly decreasing.

Nov 15, 2013
Nik increasingly frantic, desperate attempts to inject himself into the "debate" (which isn't a debate any more, except in the minds of an increasingly shrill few) says far more about his political motivation than any laughably inept attempts to counter the science.

The science is robust, multi-disciplinary and increasingly precise.

Shake your head Nik from Denierville, your eyes are clearly stuck.

Nov 15, 2013
Comic relief about motivated denial of the whole satellite temperature data set:
http://wattsupwit...ters.png

Nov 15, 2013
"Nik increasingly frantic" - Maggnus

Mostly he is just spouting incoherence that doesn't even rise to the quality of Childish Nonsense.

Witnessing his mental illness is truly sad.

Nov 15, 2013
"Old school iconic liberal journalist Alexander "Hot" Cockburn spells it out for you kiddies, and old MET man runrig, " - NikkieTard

How sad for NikieTard that the political author who he elects to use as a source of climate information knows so very little about science, in general, and thermodynamics in particular.

"Cockburn was also critical of the "greenhouse" explanation for warming by positing that it is incongruous with the laws of physics, specifically the second law of thermodynamics" - http://en.wikiped...Cockburn

Poor NikkieTard. I can only conclude that he is as ignorant of the subject of thermodynamics as his chosen author.

His is such a sad and pathetic mental disease.

Nov 15, 2013
"Marcott 2013 hockey stick that any kid can *see* " - NikkieTard

the New Marcott 'Hockey Stick

http://www.skepti..._500.png

https://skeptical...ism.html

Nov 15, 2013
NikkieTard posts the following plot

http://postimg.or...zirjyjd/

Note that the scale he has chosen has been specifically chosen by him (TO HIDE) the fractions of a degree in temperature that the data documents.

Poor NikkieTard... His mental disease makes him so unfit to do science.

I suppose that is why he is making desk lamps for a living rather than doing science.


Nov 15, 2013
I swear I couldn't invent better fake psyops alarmism clowns if I tried.

John Cook's site SkepticalScience.com was a standard reference for journalists back in the days when arcane statistics were used to conceal hoaxing and data tampering, but as of the last year alone, full meltdown mode is witnessed. In Vendicar(E)'s link Cook cooks up the bizarre idea that Marcott's own disavowed "so-called uptick" in his data drop off hockey stick blade repeadedly celebrated by The Mann, is really in fact just the happy dandy instrumental temperature record you see, so it's just fine now, you know, grafting data oranges onto data apple trees, like good scientists do *all* the time!

His group of activists, secret forum included, really has degenerated into a real doomsday Kookies cult, lead by divinity student Al Gore and Evangelical Christian John Kook. They were recently found to be hosting photos of themselves in great detail Photoshopped into old NAZI soldier photos, no less!

Nov 15, 2013
I swear I couldn't invent better fake psyops alarmism clowns if I tried.

If you say so. Based on what I've seen, inventing a semblance of academic integrity is what's giving you the most trouble. I won't tell you to take my word for it. I've seen what you do with my words. :))

Nov 15, 2013
"Vendicar(E)'s link Cook cooks up the bizarre idea that Marcott's own disavowed "so-called uptick" in his data drop off hockey stick blade repeadedly" - NikkieTard

TardieBoy hasn't posted anything coherent in more than a week.

The progression of his mental disease is self evident.


Nov 15, 2013
...here ya go: "Inventing Better Fake Psyops Alarmism Clowns for Dummies" by Yerwott Hertz

Nov 16, 2013
seriously now SCOTT, just do it

Nov 16, 2013
His group of activists, secret forum included, really has degenerated into a real doomsday Kookies cult, lead by divinity student Al Gore and Evangelical Christian John Kook. They were recently found to be hosting photos of themselves in great detail Photoshopped into old NAZI soldier photos, no less!


Wow you're really losing it there skippy. Hosting photos of themselves you say. runrig has run logical and scientific circles around you, and vendicarE has exposed you for the fraud and worse that you are, and this is the best you can respond with? No wonder the "denialists" sound so terribly shrill and desperate.

You should consider cozying up with Watt, the two of you are at about the same level. You know - pretending to be scientists while delusional visions of grandeur dance in your heads.

Laughably pathetic.

Nov 16, 2013
The sky is falling, the sky is...
Wait a minute, it should read,
We're causing the sky to fall, we're causing the sky to fall...
Aaaahhhhhhh!

Nov 16, 2013
In the Climatology cult, just *calling* quotes by Ph.D.s "inane" makes it so!


Everyone on the internet has a PhD, yourself included! don't you know that?

No wait...it's his own unpublished theory!


My own unpublished conclusion based on basic science, 30 years old, now being supported by this article and this article http://phys.org/n...on.html, and more and more.

The problem with my unpublished theory is that anyone with a highschool education can use it and make accurate predictions about climate change and macro-weather.

I guess that offends some PhDs who cannot.

Nov 16, 2013
From an older post:

-------------
You know, when I first joined this website I naively assumed contrary data and evidence would be discussed in a scientifically rational manner. More so than any other articles, climate related stories are inevitably followed by a surge of dialogue full of false logic and dismissive terminology.

RELIGION, CULT, AGENDA, CONSPIRACY, LEFTIST, SOCIALIST, PROPAGANDA, HOAX, SCAM, MYTH, ALARMIST, etc. are the talking points instead of honest discussion. Disliked personalities (e.g. Al Gore) are represented as some valid claim of proof. Persistent accusations that funding grants are the only motivations behind the majority of scientists are relentless. That, in itself, is absurd and an insult to the great researchers I have known working in the sciences they love.

Worse yet, it looks appears to look like religion vs. science – those with unshakeable faith arguing ever more vehemently against a consilience of continuously mounting evidence.

Nov 16, 2013
Older post questions:

--------
Things I've always wondered about the global warming conspiracy:

1. When was the conspiracy conceived?
2. When and where did they hold meetings to plot this?
3. Who were the organizers?
4. What made them decide they could successfully corrupt a global collection of professionals to abandon all integrity?
5. How did they manage to contact 97% of the planet's climate researchers and leave no evidence?
6. What the hell did they offer all these people to abandon their dignity?
7. What the hell did they threaten them with to guarantee they would comply and not expose the contact, the offer, or the threat?
8. How do they manage to coordinate all of the world's researchers now under their control?
9. How did the other 3% of researchers manage to ALL get hired by oil companies and conservative think-tanks?
10. Since this was so very stealthily done, RIGHT UNDER OUR NOSES, what can we do to prevent this from happening to all other research fields?

Nov 16, 2013
So they massaged their existing ground station data to include satellite data in places not well covered by weather stations and, MIRABILE DICTU, the warmist creed is reaffirmed!

Did you stop and wonder why they didn't just use the satellite data for the whole planet rather than just the missing areas? These guys are cooking the books yet again.

Nov 16, 2013
Thank you. "MASSAGED THEIR DATA" should have my post above. It was not in the original post.

Any more suggestions of dismissive language? Anyone?

Nov 16, 2013
Assuming a conspiracy:
1. Somewhere in the 1950's, it is inconceivable that an educated/interested person did not discover what was going to happen, as I did in the 1980's. 3. It can only be one culpret, big oil.
2. They used the "Thank you for smoking" www.imdb.com/title/tt0427944, apporaches, which also evolved about the same time. They pointed to amorphous causes and effects, (CO2 and warming), knowing that even with demonstrables, the effects were contentious.
2a. And the contentious was promoted, and promoted.
4. Mostly funding silly things like models with faulty though reasonable-sounding assumptions, like CO2, which at the time was not seriously increasing, and may not be now.
5. No evidence? The proof is all around you and everyday! Consider this and simply, the Earth's ice has melted, this requires energy, the energy is here for so long as that ice is melted.
6-9. They didn't, their have always been those publishing counter details.
10. I wish I had an answe

Nov 16, 2013
@plaasjaapie makes a good comment, I've brought up before.
Why do they take measurements of CO2 on the top of increasingly active volcanos in the Pacific and Italy for their data? Remotenes is one of those faulty but reasonable sounding assumptions. Mauna Loa is populated.
You want to measure these things far enough away from sources (including active volcanos) so that sources like industry and the morning commute are mollified. Some weather station not on an active volcano would be fine. In the long stretch of Pensyvania would be fine, middle of Australia would be fine... get it.
Measuring temperature... let's not discuss what that even means! Temperature vs heat! I can add heat and greenhouse insulators to a system all day and not see the temperature change at all... IF I have any amount of ice remaining in the system!
Are you amazed where this is going?
I am, and I've seen it before it was popular.

Nov 16, 2013
@plaasjaapie makes a good comment, I've brought up before.
Why do they take measurements of CO2 on the top of increasingly active volcanos in the Pacific and Italy for their data? Remotenes is one of those faulty but reasonable sounding assumptions. Mauna Loa is populated.
You want to measure these things far enough away from sources (including active volcanos) so that sources like industry and the morning commute are mollified. Some weather station not on an active volcano would be fine. In the long stretch of Pensyvania would be fine, middle of Australia would be fine... get it.


Alchemist: there are many sources of CO2 measurement, if you'd care to search, including Sat data.
As I've told you before Mauna Loa sits in the sub-tropical HP zone and as such has descending air above it's subsidence inversion (where the station is) – this air coming being well mixed air transported by jet-stream. + Isotopic measurement excludes pollution from local sources.

Nov 16, 2013
Climate science transcends sciences golden rule: empirical data ie observational evidence. In the last 100 years there hasn't been a single degree celsius change in global temperature. Where is the crisis?

Seems like every day there is an apologist plug to why the warming is not more prominent, or why it is taking such a long time for these calculated climate changes to present themselves in the real world.

The simple truth is: the science is bunk and the anthropogenic warming is negligible.

Nov 16, 2013
Climate science transcends sciences golden rule: empirical data ie observational evidence. In the last 100 years there hasn't been a single degree celsius change in global temperature. Where is the crisis?

Correct … it's been +0.8C
My friend, humans live ~80 odd years if lucky and as such we individually see but a small part of a geologically/ecologically major change – I happen to be among the unselfish proportion of the population who would like to see the Earth passed on as little damaged as we can manage to future generations. But then I don't have tax dollars I have tax Pounds..

Nov 16, 2013
Wow, the UNIPCC has a billion dollar model that is missing about five first order terms and can't see very well, and along comes this dude who solves the problem in his spare time, in his basement, in his underwear. And he gets serious attention from the trades. Haha.

Nov 16, 2013
This report is bunk. Everyone knows that 97% of the world's top scientists agree that unicorns stole the warming.

Nov 17, 2013
Wow, the UNIPCC has a billion dollar model that is missing about five first order terms and can't see very well

Oh, really? Interesting since they (IPCC) say that "a variety of integrations (and models) must be used to produce an ensemble of climate states." Were you referring to a specific model? And by 'about five 1st-order terms' do you mean like 2 or 3? 4? So, which 1st-order terms are missing?

Nov 17, 2013
This report is bunk. Everyone knows that 97% of the world's top scientists agree that unicorns stole the warming.

Actually, everyone now knows where you stand, and that you've offered nothing substantive to defend the stance. Not even humor, but nice try.

Nov 17, 2013
"Wow, the UNIPCC has a billion dollar model that is missing about five first order terms " - Richard CrossDresser

Really? What are they and how do you know they are first order.

Where is your model that shows your claim to be true?

We are waiting for you to substantiate your lie.

Nov 17, 2013
"In the last 100 years there hasn't been a single degree celsius change in global temperature." - Kron

Overheard from a 911 trade tower jumper....

"I've fallen 100 floors so far and haven't hit bottom yet.

Where is the crisis?"

"The simple truth is: the science is bunk" - Kron

and yet 97% of the worlds scientists claim otherwise.

They are vastly smarter than you are.

Collectively they are smarter than you have the capacity to imagine.


Nov 17, 2013
"Why do they take measurements of CO2 on the top of increasingly active volcanos in the Pacific" - Alchemist

Just to piss you off.

Seriously, the site was selected as part of the vast global conspiracy by the illuminati to enslave the world.

Oh, wait.....

Co2 levels are now so high that high school students can measure the deviation from historical levels.

Damn those High School students. They must be part of the Illuminati Conspiracy.

Nov 17, 2013
"Assuming a conspiracy:" - Alchemist

It is vastly more productive just to assume that you are a moron, and move on.....


Nov 17, 2013
Alchemist: there are many sources of CO2 measurement, if you'd care to search, including Sat data.
As I've told you before Mauna Loa sits in the sub-tropical HP zone and as such has descending air above it's subsidence inversion (where the station is) – this air coming being well mixed air transported by jet-stream. + Isotopic measurement excludes pollution from local sources.

That could be runrig, my memory isn't the best: Were you the one who gave me a wild goose chase for all the stations in Italy that were on top of volcanos, or the one who assumed I couldn't read French and so supplied a non-sequitor graph, that would support the theory, if you couldn't read the article?

No matter what, the isolation arguement doesn't work for an active volcano or a city, you can claim inversions, compensation algorithms, but these should be unnecessary for a "flag-ship" measuring station-and hence suspicious.

We must be able to agree on that.

Nov 17, 2013
Climate science transcends sciences golden rule: empirical data ie observational evidence. In the last 100 years there hasn't been a single degree celsius change in global temperature. Where is the crisis?

Kron, there is wisdom in what you say. Temperature increase is indeed a secondary effect the mainstream media uses to confuse.
Consider the Earth. If I gave you all the heating units in the world with which to warm the Earth, could you do it?
It is a good and not obvious question. If you added heat slowly enough, the Earth will not warm: Glacial and Polar Ice will melt, lowering the temperature all together.

@Vendi, as soon as intelleigent discourse begins, you need to urinated all over it. I am starting to pity you, even as I stop reading your posts.

Nov 17, 2013
"@Vendi, as soon as intelleigent discourse begins, you need to urinated all over it." - AlchemisTard

"Urinate", not "Urinated"

Is your improper use of the word proof that you are in league with the Whore of Lucifer?

Nov 17, 2013
Here is the active increase of the volcano...
http://hvo.wr.usg...data.php

If you look more into it, they are all increasing in that area.

Nov 17, 2013
The Alchemist offered
"Here is the active increase of the volcano...
http://hvo.wr.usg...data.php

If you look more into it, they are all increasing in that area."
There is a CO2 monitoring station there which the linked article states:-
"..changes in gas emissions can signal a change in eruptive status.."
and
"..establish normal background levels for gases emitted from the volcano.."
Which raises (at least) these questions (more anybody & without complaining rhetoric Eg. Nik):-

1. How is the raw data corrected for average regional levels of CO2 not attributed to the volcano and how significant is the local weighting on this site ?

2. What do the nearest three CO2 monitoring stations which are not on or adjacent to volcanoes show in terms of average regional levels ?

3. How far away are those in item 2 above ?

4. What are the prevailing winds in terms of what can be attributed to the site in question ?


Nov 17, 2013
That could be runrig, my memory isn't the best: Were you the one who gave me a wild goose chase for all the stations in Italy that were on top of volcanos, or the one who assumed I couldn't read French and so supplied a non-sequitor graph, that would support the theory, if you couldn't read the article?

No.

Nov 17, 2013
You've convinced me Nik.

Nov 17, 2013
Obviously, aliens are stealing our heat. We are watching [for] YOU aliens.

Nov 17, 2013
'Missing heat' discovery prompts new estimate of global warming
Isn't it amazing how this magical "missing heat" knows to hide only in places we have not looked before? And isn't it amazing it doesn't affect surrounding regions which have lengthy temperature records?

I wonder, how does it do that? If we can figure this out, might we not be able to finally resolve the ubiquitous arguments over the thermostat?


Nov 17, 2013
Once you do the math on water's specific heat, ice through to latent heat of fusion through to melt water do you realise 'heat', its flow & interaction with a myriad sea currents is hugely complex & dynamic.

However one rather simple fact should be noted from the basic physics of the properties of water in that:-

If the very same heat that melts ice at zero degrees to produce water at zero degrees were then applied to the water from zero degrees it would raise its temperature to about 79 degrees Celsius !

Then its just a matter of distribution & running the numbers asymptotically until we run out of ice, where will we be then ?

One could then infer that the 97% of climate scientists who accept global warming trends despite local oddities have a good understanding of thermodynamics.

Such as:- http://en.wikiped...iki/Heat

Why is it the bulk of AGW deniers appear ignorant of this simple (although) unusual phenomena - too hard ?

Nov 17, 2013
Seriously, the heat is hiding just where there are no thermometers? How clever of it. This ruse failed when they tried to prove antarctica was warming with just the same sort of temperature averaging scheme a few years ago. Didn't work then, not gonna work now. Give it up guys. AGW is freezing to death. CPR isn't going to save it.

Nov 17, 2013
@Mike Massaen
A genuinely interested and objective individual? Get your galoshes and rubber coat on, you are about to be irrationally insulted by the trolls of this sight.

To be fair,I am beating runrig to the punch that they do claim to compensate for the activity and weather at the volcanos. But I think we can agree that we could do that anywhere. Which raises the question.

As far a the remoteness arguement, I think I said, it is an occupied island.

Hang in there Mike, we need you.

Nov 17, 2013

Seriously, the heat is hiding just where there are no thermometers? How clever of it. This ruse failed when they tried to prove antarctica was warming with just the same sort of temperature averaging scheme a few years ago….

Obviously anything "missing" is most likely to be "where we've not looked (thermometers)".
You do understand the basics of a system that means the Arctic will change quickest (and Antarctic interior the slowest - for unique reasons). Yes, No?
You are aware that the Arctic comprises 1/6th the area of the planet? And that even a small changes of temp in a short-term period makes a large change in trend?
Look at the graphic at the top of this page. What colour do you suppose we infill the un-mapped area? (from the colours surrounding) Would you suggest that white is best used? Or perhaps red, even dark red?

When you get up from your rabbit-hole be careful you're not blinded by a sudden flash of logic and coherence.

Nov 17, 2013
Isn't it amazing how this magical "missing heat" knows to hide only in places we have not looked before?

No, missing things are often found in the last place you think of looking, and sometimes they're found even in places you didn't think to look.

Nov 17, 2013
@Mike Massaen
A genuinely interested and objective individual? Get your galoshes and rubber coat on, you are about to be irrationally insulted by the trolls of this sight. … Hang in there Mike, we need you.

Uh, did you read Mike's post on heat of fusion that started, "Once you do the math …." and ended, "Why is it that the bulk of AGW deniers appear ignorant of this simple (although) unusual phenomena – too hard?" ?

Nov 17, 2013
]
By producing a truly global temperature record, we aim to better understand the drivers of recent climate change.
Recent climate change? Just because we have had the instruments to measure climate data over the last few decades climate change is recent? That's like saying that AIDS has only been around since 1981, because that is just abouthow old the technology that enabled us to detect the virus has been around, whereas people have probably been dying from it for millenia. They used to call it consumption.

Nov 18, 2013
Recent climate change? Just because we have had the instruments to measure climate data over the last few decades climate change is recent?

4 billion years ago, the climate was inhospitable. It changed. That would not be called a recent change. For a most excellent perspective on recent climate changes, just covering the last 65 million years, please see this page on "Temperature" from John Baez: http://math.ucr.e...erature/

Nov 18, 2013
] That's like saying that AIDS has only been around since 1981, because that is just abouthow old the technology that enabled us to detect the virus has been around, whereas people have probably been dying from it for millenia. They used to call it consumption.

AIDS=consumption??? Erm, no, definitely not:
http://pubs.acs.o...ine.html
http://medical-di...sease%29
(note, the only mention of AIDS is that it can be a facilitator (gives defective immune system) for a SIMILAR disease)
As for AIDS, that's caused by a retrovirus & only evolved into its current form from a version infecting simians. The most recent common ancestor appears to be around 1910 - not millenia as you suggest. As for the technology, that predates 1981 too. See 'origins' in:
http://en.wikiped...HIV/AIDS
Regards, DH66

Nov 18, 2013
@Unbiased Observer:
Did you actually READ what I linked to, and why, BEFORE you rated me? If you had done any checking, you would have noticed that I answered to what baudrunner had said, rather than downranking him. If you have a problem with legitimate answers, then at least have the courtesy to say why. Rating people down for the sake of it (especially without reading what is linked to or posted), is just trolling. Also, not very unbiased. And not observant.
DH66

Nov 18, 2013
@goracle,
Sorry man, I spent an evening hunting the crap down and coming up with nothing. They measured on an increasingly active volcano, there are others on other active volcanoes, there are still others in the ant/arctic, and none of them have any reason to be used.

The bottom line is that the Gore chart starts with agglomerated reading, shifts to arctic/ant readings and then to Macadamia Nut island, no reason I can see.

Nov 18, 2013
@DH66

Wow, sensitive? Ranking people down because they have incorrect assumptions is perfectly legitmate. Basically you posted something that everyone already knows and expect kudos? While you are correct that consumption != AIDS, you did not address any other point he made. While his analogy was incorrect, context allows us to derive his original point, which is not unreasonable. You could have approached this quite differently and received higher points.

You yourself made a mistake if I remember some of my medical info while the tech for testing for HIV may have been available around in 1981, the first test for HIV wasn't developed until 1985.

PS - Stop acting like such a victim. You ignored an argument and tried catch someone on a technicality, while simultaneously making a mistake yourself. Grow up.
PSS - And I didn't rate him high either and personal attacks don't make you friends. If you want a troll go up a couple posts and look at VendicarE.

Nov 19, 2013
Steve McIntyre chimes in, models still starved of Hansen's hothouse:
http://wattsupwit...-models/

...with a Hockey Stick Team worthy difference curve!
http://climateaud...2013.png

Nov 19, 2013
...with a Hockey Stick Team worthy difference curve!
http://climateaud...2013.png


Interesting eh?
After 2005 the ENSO cycle generally flipped into cool/neutral, and 2005 was close to 1998 as the warmest year on instrumental record (some data sets make it warmest, some not).

http://www.metoff...perature

By 2007 a greater/warmer Arctic water extent could well have caused a sig shift in climate patterns. There is ongoing research into the effect this has had. Vis more frequent –AO events and Winter severe spells in Europe.

http://nsidc.org/...e_index/

Or are you/McIntyre implying different?

Nov 19, 2013
runrig, I have noticed that the satellite temperature data that shows a lull globally does indeed show a recent Arctic hockey stick blade, enhanced by soot (?):
http://postimg.or...owlv7cd/

More detailed analysis of this paper, here:
http://wattsupwit...-trends/

"The datasets produced by Cowtan and Way (2013) do not appear to provide polar amplification for the period of 1979 to 2004, because the HADCRUT4 data warmed faster than the Cowtan and Way (2013) data before 2005. See the discussions of Figures 3, 4 and 5.

Increasing polar-amplified warming in the Arctic does not help climate models, which show poor polar amplification results. Refer to the discussions of Figures 7, 8 and 9.

And due to the differences in the spatial patterns of warming and cooling, using lower troposphere temperatures to infill surface temperature data appears questionable."

Nov 19, 2013
WUWT tidbits:

hunter: "The climate hypesters will adjust the data and change the standards until they have the answer they want. / This is just another, of a very large number, of AGW deception papers. / When climate hypesters are not hiding declines, they are "adjusting" data. When they are not adjusting data they are cherry picking. When they are not cherry picking, they are using populations of zero to "infill" data. And when all of that fails (and it does), they move the goal posts."

DPP: "So no 17 year pause or slowdown? Hmmm…okay. Also no increased trend in 'extreme weather' events, rate of sea level rise, spread of disease, three eyed kittens, birds flying backwards etc. Trying to fix the models, does not fix the failed theory. / The tighter they pull on the loose thread, the more holes open up. At some point their ass is going to fall out for all to see, and they are not going to be able to fit all their junk back in no matter how hard they try."

Nov 19, 2013
Hockey Stick breaker Steve McIntyre chastises study author Way on ClimateAudit.org, referring to a public backup of their secret tree house club forum on the skeptic bashing site SkepticalScience.com:

"As to my remarks on your comments in the SKS forum: over the years, I've gotten tired of people privately conceding the validity of my criticisms of paleoclimate practices, but failing to do so publicly. In your case, your SKS forum comments show that you agreed with many of my criticisms, but, instead of saying so at SKS, you called me a "conspiracy wackjob" – an offensive and untrue allegation. instead of apologizing when I took issue in my above remarks – as you ought to have done – you complained that your remarks had become public. I understand that you were young at the time and I would be quite happy to accept your withdrawal of these offensive and untrue remarks and move on. But first you have to withdraw the allegations, rather than complaining about how they became public."

Nov 19, 2013
...as anybody can thus see, the lunatic foul mouthed trolls on this very site are part and parcel representations of mainstream climate "science," with official statements of support being offered to dishonestly slanderous author May by the likes of one of Germany's top "climatologists," Hockey Stick Team member Rahmstorf, who keeps creating virtual sea level fantasies that he still labels "sea level" and then so do other Team members even though tide gauges falsify his result. Adding dam and reservoir water on land to sea level while hand waving away well water pumping and then telling policy makers you have a more accurate sea level result is immoral.

Nov 19, 2013
Bunch of dummies over there at ClimateAudit.org, eh?:

"loc="http://www.climat...tas.tab"
dest= "d:/temp/ chron_glb_tas.tab"
download.file(loc,dest,mode="wb")
load(dest)
chron=chron_glb_tas
dim(chron) #5412 82

anom=function(x,start=-999999,end=999999,Round=2) { #assumes time series
work= ts( rep(1:12,ceiling(tsp(x)[2]-tsp(x)[1]+1)), start= floor(tsp(x)[1]),freq=12)
work=window(work,start=tsp(x)[1],end= tsp(x)[2] )
anom=month=factor(work)
temp= time(x)>=start & time(x)<= (end+1)
levels(anom)=unlist(tapply(x[temp],month[temp],mean,na.rm=TRUE))
anom= round(x- as.numeric(as.character(anom)),Round)
return(anom)
}

work=chron
P=ncol(chron)
for(i in 1:P) work[,i]=anom(work[,i],1980,1999.99)
chrona=work
ann= ts( array(NA, dim=c( nrow(work)/12,P) ),start=tsp(work)[1])
for(i in 1:P) ann[,i]= annavg(work[,i])

ann=window(ann,1880,2099.99)
ci= t (apply(ann,1, function(x) quantile...."

Nov 19, 2013
ClimateAudit commenter ilmis reveals study author Cowtan at work on the formerly secret SKS forum:

"Cowtan on finding an error in a Rahmstorf-Tamino paper that claimed there is no slow-down"

Cowtan: "Well, I could write a response to ERL, showing why the solar contribution is overestimated. And thus show that warming has in fact slowed in the last decade. … But it is an extremely disheartening prospect, doing a load of work to point out an error by someone whom I greatly respect, and who has contributed more to the debunking of climate denial than I will ever acheive."

"In the end he seems to consider contacting Tamino (in 2011, "Better that I do it than a denier") but never follows up, on that thread at least."

Nov 19, 2013
...ilmis continues...

Cowtan quote: "It's looking like when 2012 begins, we are again going to be in the sitation where HADCRUT shows 11 years of negative trend. Worse, if the La Nina holds on, it could reach 12 years in 2013. Worst of all, it may turn out to be a statisitcally signficant deviation from the 1975-2000 trend."

"It's somewhat unsettling. Years of relentless work to push the warming trend up, one small step at a time, with subtle and esoteric corrections. But refusal to notify a friendly team member about a correction that would give support to the pause."

"Things could look different if these people worked to genuinely correct the scientific record instead of pushing a narrative."

"Is there any correction in the other direction? Has UHI become net cooling yet?"

FULL ILMIS COMMENT:
http://climateaud...t-449976

[UHI = the urban heat island effect]

Nov 19, 2013
The Rahmstorf-Tamino reference of ilmis refers to blogger Tamino who is also a Team member who for years convinced the cult followers of his highly moderated blog that the oldest thermometer record of all of Central England actually represented a hockey stick by a textbook case of lying with statistics, and *this* by a man who self-published a little hard copy book on watching out for statistical lies! I debunked his claim by feeding sample data into his chosen software smoothing filter, and noted Phil "Hide The Decline" jones using the same deception for an IPCC report.

Single glance graphic:
http://s1.postimg...INAL.gif

Nov 19, 2013
Account NOM is now acting as an often minute fast, downratings bot, and though NOM does comment on occasion, unlike all the other ratings bots here, all on the alarmist side, his Activity tab in his profile is blank, suggesting an administrator account on Phys.org, a site owned by a green energy educational consulting firm which explains the daily dose of headline grabbing climate alarm. NOM explains that he is temped to kill:
http://s12.postim...reat.jpg

Commenter Vendicar(E) is more aggressive:
http://s11.postim...eats.gif

Nov 19, 2013
WUWT tidbit:

Commenter Jimbo presents abstracts of *many* mainstream referenced studies that show that Greenland was warming/melting more rapidly in the dust bowl era of the 1930s, Greenland being by far the *largest* ice mass that the current study is radically revising the temperature history of:

http://wattsupwit...-1479500

"We show that many land-terminating glaciers underwent a more rapid retreat in the 1930s than in the 2000s...."

"…the rate of warming in 1920–1930 was about 50% higher than that in 1995–2005…."

"…The annual whole ice sheet 1919–32 warming trend is 33% greater in magnitude than the 1994–2007 warming…."

"…The warmest year in the extended Greenland temperature record is 1941, while the 1930s and 1940s are the warmest decades…."

"…the rate of warming in 1920–1930 was about 50% higher than that in 1995–2005…."

Nov 19, 2013
What's amusing is that Phys.org that so far allows skeptical comments has an Alexa world web traffic traffic ranking of 5,921 whereas the coauthors' own widely supported post facto revisionist skeptic smear site that suddenly moderates out skeptical follow ups to achieve the dishonest illusion of triumph, SkepticalScience.com, is ranked at a barely alive 82,489 as of today, as I act as a chemist, distilling the crowd sourced skeptical knowledge base into their essence. WattsUpWithThat.com suddenly *tripled* its popularity ranking from 30K to 10K this very year, as I posted links to them, here on Phys.org, uh...coincidentally:
http://s6.postimg...mage.jpg

Michael "Hide The Decline" Mann himself pointed to a post here this year that I similarly engaged in, again establishing a clear link between the sockputtet account abuse hurled upon criticism, and the Team at the heart of climate alarm:
http://wattsupwit...nomenon/

Nov 19, 2013
Study author Robert Way is also coauthor with SkepticalScience.com founder John Cook of a totally bogus "confirmation" of the original mere weak-case-survey-question original junk science claim by Orsekes that most skeptics need be included in (!). What a mess this kid is in! Yet these guys *represent* mainstream climate "science."

One statistician pointed out that their bizarre use of the obscure term "global climate change" to select their study abstracts, when corrected to "global warming" or "climate change" reversed their consensus to minority status!

Climatologist Mike Hulme berated them so badly that cartoonist Josh was inspired to capture the "Walk Of Shame" moment from earlier this very year:
http://wattsupwit...hame.jpg

"...97% consensus article is poorly conceived, poorly designed and poorly executed...." - Hulme

Nov 19, 2013
In the formerly secret forum of SkepticalScience.com, these incompetents who placed a backup copy in a public web site directory, Robert Way's coauthor and site founder John Cook conspired to plan results of a positive funding of 97% consensus *before* the analysis had been even started!

Details: http://www.popula...lan.html

"To achieve this goal, we mustn't fall into the trap of spending too much time on analysis and too little time on promotion. As we do the analysis, would be good to have the marketing plan percolating along as well." - John Cook, 2012

Nov 19, 2013
There's good reason cartoonist Josh referred to the likes of coauthor Cowtan's group of activists over at SKepticalScience.com as a Tree House Club:
http://s6.postimg...mage.jpg

Kevin Cowtan on the secreté SKS forum, quoted by Steve McIntyre::

"If you want it to be a good game, the best way to do it is to pick a game out of the top 500 rankings on boardgamegeek and retheme it (although Cleudo is probably the best of the classics).

Off the top of my head, 'Pandemic' might be a good candidate. It's a cooperative game in which all the players are working together to save the world from 4 pandemic diseases. Change the diseases to climate myths. The Epidemic cards can have pictures fro the deniers on. The operatives (players) could either be well known mythbusters, like John, or climate scientists, or more generic roles (climate scientist, environmental journalist, climate blogger etc."

Nov 19, 2013
SkepticalScience.com main partner Dana Nuccitelli who also blogs for The Guardian, has a day job at a nuclear weapons design firm called Tetra Tech that also receives the likes of $300,000,000 green energy grants.
[Details: http://www.popula...-by.html ]

Dana is seen here in the NAZI photos also discovered in a public SKS directory this year:
http://wattsupwit...boy2.jpg
http://wattsupwit...boy2.jpg
http://wattsupwit...kboy.jpg

[Backgound of this "hacked" web site directory:
http://wattsupwit...w-level/ ]

Nov 19, 2013
@DarkHorse66: This quote from a pbs.org page:
Africans have hunted chimps and monkeys and kept them as pets for centuries; they've presumably been exposed to SIVs during most of that time.
Why just centuries? Anyway, the analogy was made to point out that since we have been studying instrumental climate data over the last few decades, we shouldn't infer that we have been causing it. Fifty years is a hairline breadth of time compared to the entire geological time frame. The obvious correlation between the Earth's axial precession and ice age cycles cannot be overlooked. And, yes, the last phase of ice melt in the Arctic will show a logarithmic increase in the rate of that melting, because of the compounding effect of ice loss on ambient temperatures and because ocean currents are carrying away the cold water into tropical areas, seriously affecting weather. "Global warming" is now an industry, invented by alarmists. It won't go away, but climate change is inevitable.

Nov 19, 2013
@Nik: Do you have any near-term (< 100 y) predictions for the climate? Near as I can tell so far, you're predicting that predictions from IPCC are wrong. And I don't have much to base that observation on other than your spam to science ratio, which is about 100:1. And the science side of that is shaky at best since you don't follow-up most counter points (which usually contain links to peer-reviewed material) that are posted by runrig and others (except in rare cases, and even then, your follow-up is quickly refuted with more links to more peer-reviewed science). Rambling, mud-slinging rants don't count for much in the giant scheme of things. So Nik, where are we headed climate wise?

Nov 19, 2013
Speaking of satellites vs. ground data, today shock jock blogger Steven Goddard presents a simple, data-referenced, difference curve between the official National Climatic Data Center (NCDC) global average temperature results (after a mind blowing hockey stick overall adjustment curve is added to their final product that is then used by *all* of climate "science"), to demonstrate that satellite data (RSS = Remote Sensing Systems) makes a mockery of this study:
http://stevengodd...correct/

"The graph below plots the difference between adjusted NCDC US temperature anomalies and RSS US temperature anomalies. NCDC shows a strong US warming trend, and RSS shows no US warming trend. NCDC and RSS are diverging at an astonishing 2.4ºC per century."

2.4° is the ENTIRE alarmist scenario!

Nov 19, 2013
Propagandist Protoplasmix protests: "So Nik, where are we headed climate wise?"

The head of climatology at Georgia Tech, Dr. Judith Curry in a peer reviewed 2013 publication indicates that our recent warming spike and now twenty fucking year lull, are both explained by ocean cycle variations. A Google search for "STADIUM WAVE CURRY" answers his testy Q:
https://www.googl...%20curry

I personally used the NOAA's own Climate.gov web site to provide a poor man's early version of her claim:
http://s16.postim...mage.jpg

Nov 19, 2013
The meme, push-sold by literal PR firm tutored propagandist Protoplasmix is that peer/pal review thwarted Koch brother mother fucking funded (damn it!!!) deniers of climate change (sic)...uh...thoze BAHD guyz, they...uh...don't build climate models so...NO NO NO...no listen thoze BAHD MEN.

We call these sorry dupes "bitter enders," properly, as they play a canned Gorebot confidence game like it was still 2008, prior to Climategate.

Nov 19, 2013
Protoplasmix fantasizes: "Rambling, mud-slinging rants don't count for much in the giant scheme of things."

Oh, but book writers with millions of eventual readers will find my skeptical distillate, and in coming decades, help immunize Science forever from villainous corruption. If I am ranting, please egg me on, Propogandist Protoplasmix, instead of try to psyche me out, eh?

Have you even ever visited a real, messy, confused, hard empirical science laboratory in your whole life? What is your background and stake in this?

My own fight is local. I live on the Upper West Side, two blocks from Jim Hansen/RealClimate headquarters, so I as an adult surrounded by left wing intellectuals who I enjoy dining around, well it was either hide my opinions or destroy the corrupt beast in a full frontal assault. Manhood won the day.

Nov 19, 2013
I wonder if "Protoplasmix" is profitably proud aromatic Dr. Anderson:

"Global warming professor Kevin Anderson 'cuts back on washing and showering' to fight climate change – Admits at UN climate summit: 'That is why I smell.'

"Anderson also defended his advocacy of 'a planned economic recession' to combat man-made global warming."

"Prof Anderson, I note, is a non-executive director of Greenstone Carbon Management, which makes a pretty penny advising clients including Eversheds, Clifford Chance, Fujitsu, Henderson Global Investors, Ocado,and Virgin UK on how to reduce their carbon emissions."

[Reference: http://www.neweco...anderson ]

Nov 19, 2013
IF I MAKE FUN OF RANTING, LIKE THIS!!!, these misanthropic oddballs chime in that I'm ranting, as if I'm really screaming, even though it's just capitol letters, playfully entered into a text entry box on an iPhone, as counterpoint. If their severe lack of a sense of irony or humor doesn't upset you, then it should, since these doomsday cultists are currently in charge of US energy policy.

"You can keep your climate data if you like it. Period." - Enroncare flier

Nov 20, 2013
Nik,
So you advocate including the dynamics of the stadium wave in the IPCC integrations. That wasn't so hard, was it?
We all practice psychology, Nik: sometimes a forum is just a forum. <--Not bad, huh? Seriously, you flatter me with terms like propagandist, and with associations to people and institutions and scientific works. But I don't know them from Adam. So kindly dial it down a few notches. When you use the unsound logic of hasty generalizations about me, it makes me perceive you as a practitioner of pseudoscience. Go figure.
Writing a book you say? Thanks for the correction, I should've prefaced "rambling mud-slinging" with "self-serving". Live and learn.
My background is being born left-handed, but I specialize in ambidexterity. :)

Nov 20, 2013
@goracle,
Sorry man, I spent an evening hunting the crap down and coming up with nothing. They measured on an increasingly active volcano, there are others on other active volcanoes, there are still others in the ant/arctic, and none of them have any reason to be used.

The bottom line is that the Gore chart starts with agglomerated reading, shifts to arctic/ant readings and then to Macadamia Nut island, no reason I can see.


@goracle,
Sorry man, I spent an evening hunting the crap down and coming up with nothing. They measured on an increasingly active volcano, there are others on other active volcanoes, there are still others in the ant/arctic, and none of them have any reason to be used.

The bottom line is that the Gore chart starts with agglomerated reading, shifts to arctic/ant readings and then to Macadamia Nut island, no reason I can see.


Nov 20, 2013
The theory of delusional denialism encompasses the contrarianism displayed continually by Nik from Pedophiliaville. As usual, a mix of half truths, out of context quotes. and reliance on minutia to create an atmosphere of doubt in a robust and essentially settled field of science.

A continuing study in duplicitous tactics and shrill protestations. An interesting subject, despite his obvious descent into madness.

Nov 20, 2013
Manhood won the day.


Is that what you told police that day? It was manhood?

A full frontal assault requires that you actually meet the challenges head on, not denigrate into a self-pitying cesspool of innuendo, out of context quoting, and data manipulation.

Nov 20, 2013
Especially for you, Nik, hot off the self-publication presses, no forum required: "Sorry, I'm Not An Apologist" by Kly Mitz Vorming and Noah Tizzant
Could be a best-seller.

Nov 20, 2013
Maggnus, I told the police via my lawyer to check the half dozen surveillance videos from my campus area, mostly student housing, high security doorman building, and so they did, and charges were dropped since I was seen in five time stamped videos at home when some creeper grabbed a shopping mall kid downtown. Thanks though, for once again demonstrating the vicious nature of natural climate change denialism, and your lack of compassion and sympathy for my plight is duly noted. Lubos Motl was twice audited, and might my existence as an outspoken Global Warming skeptic have helped inspire my being shoved into a lineup? I have no idea.

Now that you are aware, as any stalker like you must be, that charges were dropped, no trial or plea bargain occurred, to slander me in the future amounts to libelous defamation of character with intent to extort.

Nov 20, 2013
Details of Frankenstein anatomy from Dr. David Whitehouse via WUWT:

(1) "The researchers created what they call a hybrid global temperature dataset from the satellite and ground data. When ground data is available they used that. When it was not they adjusted the satellite data over that region to produce an estimate of the ground data. They created global temperature databases based on their two approaches. They also removed data at the start and saw if their method was any good in reproducing the deleted data."

(2) "Given that Antarctica shows no overall warming and that the missing Arctic region is a very small section, about 6 per cent, of the globe, it is curious, perhaps even a fluke that such a small region of the Earth has come to the rescue of climate science from the undermining 'pause?'"

Nov 20, 2013
...
(3) "This new work doesn't affect the fact that the temperature databases, with their own allowances for data-free regions, show no warming for 16-years, or at the very least no warming for about 95% of the globe for 16-years. That in itself is inconsistent with the climate models."

(4) "This research is interesting but doesn't live up to the headline that it explains the 'pause.' It also does not warrant such an extensive press release, complete with explanatory videos. It is clear that it has been used as a political tool to deride 'sceptics' who rightly see the 'pause' as significant. By aiming at 'sceptics' such an approach also derides many working scientists who are trying to explain the 'pause.' This is regrettable."

Full essay: http://wattsupwit...ne-away/

Nov 20, 2013
Protoplasmix, I hope I haven't antagonized a fence sitter. I wonder if you can understand my jaw dropping sense that fraud lies at the very core of Hockey Stick Team claims, upon seeing my above described Marcott 2013 hockey stick links?:

(A) Input data for Marcott, plotted from their own supplement:
http://postimg.or...zirjyjd/

(B) Mathematician Mann himself celebrating it:
http://s15.postim...2013.jpg

Isn't it rather *odd* that skeptics pointing out that there's no hockey stick in the input data is met with frantic hate speech, day after day, here?

Is it really not blindingly clear that a pattern of deception is being exposed, merely?

Can you also not use a bit of emotional intelligence to understand how regular slander and hate speech attacks on skeptics might make us angry and defensive?

And if you have been overexposed to tribalistic dehumanization chants (denier, denier, denier!) in books and on blogs etc., then what does that make you?

Nov 20, 2013
Chris Monkton who was one of Margaret Thatcher's science advisors back when the chemistry trained Prime Minister was instrumental in setting the whole Gore Ball Warming in motion, now chimes in, skeptically:

"The fundamental conceptual error that Cowtan & Way had made lay in their failure to realize that large uncertainties do not reduce the length of The Pause: they actually increase it."

He goes on to explain that, statistically, their complex data hybridization has indeed created a Frankenstein monster of necessarily much wider resulting error bars in their overall result that thus allows a *longer* warming pause to be claimed as statistically plausible!

Nov 20, 2013
Monckton: "Publication of papers such as Cowtan & Way, which really ought not to have passed peer review, does indicate the growing desperation of institutions such as the Royal Meteorological Society, which, like every institution that has profiteered by global warming, does not want the flood of taxpayer dollars to become a drought." / "Those driving the scare have by now so utterly abandoned the search for truth that is the end and object of science that they are incapable of thinking straight. They have lost the knack."

[Full essay with his usual boilerplate filler: http://wattsupwit...-course/ ]

Nov 20, 2013
Above I claimed: "Instead of proactively engage in losing debates within skeptical blogs, they have formed multiple orbiting mirror blogs of WattsUpWithThat.com where they huddle to kvetch and whine about skeptics."

Well, as I write this on world Internet ranking site #5,921 here is a look at a site ranked #431,854 called HotWhopper:
http://blog.hotwh...way.html

"Anthony Watts' protest about Cowtan, Way and the Arctic"

...blah blah blah about evil comments within WattsUpWithThat.com blogroll.

There are dozens of these little alarmist community blogs with members that are viscerally averse to skepticism. Well, with a dozen favorite orbiting blogs full of daily doses of hate speech, Al Gorism Climatology cult members are so riled up that when they appear on Phys.org, you know, a *normal* site, they are frothing at the mouth after their daily group bonding sessions. On everyday news sites, they organize to ban skepticism, successfully.

Nov 20, 2013
This comment has been removed by a moderator.

Nov 20, 2013
Here is what the whole Climatology cult is so worried about enough to start grasping for "missing heat," a current plot of HadCRUT4 diverging from CO₂:
http://wottsupwit...fig3.png

That site is yet another orbiter blog, one of *two* called Wotts Up With That.

To avoid having their blog arguments possibly torn to shreds by thirty thousand propeller heads at the actual WUWT blog, they simply don't post them there. Instead, they *orbit* and group bond. Whenever Tony Watts blusters a bit, they shudder in angst, collectively, day after bitter day. Fairly composed runrig, above, in many a thread here has displayed similar aversion to mere links to perfectly ordinary skeptical blogs mostly devoid of political taint. Their lashing out on news sites has minted many a skeptic, in fact nearly every one describes the same path to recovery from naive belief in climate "scientists."

[Link: http://wottsupwit...mment-1/ ]

Nov 20, 2013
The Tree House Gang of SkepticalScience.com that includes these two literally amateur hour study authors ("carried out the research in his spare time") got really great press at least *last* time, when Obama's Twitter account announced the result of Cook and Nuccetelli 2013: "Ninety-seven percent of scientists agree: #climate change is real, man-made and dangerous.":
http://thinkprogr...eet1.png

...alas, their next paper together was flatly rejected, with *scathing* reviews:
http://www.earth-...ion.html

And last month Harvard's Willie Soon and Chris Monckton et al. have in peer review demolished their original, finding a true consensus of dangerous man made global warming to be 0.3%, using Cook's same data:
http://wattsupwit...-errors/

"...exposed grave errors in an earlier paper in a new and unknown journal...

Nov 20, 2013
"Chris Monkton who was one of Margaret Thatcher's science advisors back when the chemistry trained Prime Minister was instrumental in setting the whole Gore Ball Warming in motion, now chimes in, skeptically:"


Nik: This isn't meant to be "Monty Python" ( who are reforming on a project BTW).
So why reference/quote Monckton?

I'm just forced to put up this link so peeps can have a laugh...

http://www.youtub...yctTvuCo

Nov 20, 2013
... twenty fucking year lull,


Ah right Nik: It's grown to twenty years has it - cripes I must have gone into rip-van-winkle mode, as the last time I checked it's been 15 years since '98 and only 8 since 2005, which at least tied with '98 as the warmest year on record.

Dr. Judith Curry in a peer reviewed 2013 publication indicates that our recent warming spike .. f-word..., are both explained by ocean cycle variations.


Tell me pray, how an ocean continually acts as a heat source on the atmosphere? without said atmosphere returning to the initial state? The Ocean gets it heat from the Sun ( unless we delve into volcanoes). It will add heat to air, obviously, but equally obviously it has a finite excess and comes a time when it/air cools back to the previous cycle minimum.

Also deep water is warming (0.65C) represents a rise of 65C if (magically) it could be instantly put into the atmosphere. It's come from the Sun and has been retained - because of GHG's.

Nov 20, 2013

Now that you are aware, as any stalker like you must be, that charges were dropped, no trial or plea bargain occurred, to slander me in the future amounts to libelous defamation of character with intent to extort.


Oh, and we are to take your word for it are we? Bahaha as laughing inept at law as you are at chemistry I see. Tell me Nik from Pedophiliaville, why would I take the word of a slanderous wretch who stated purpose is to attack the reputations of real scientists who actually do science? You don't do science, you design lighting! You're a fraudulent liar and a criminal.

Nov 20, 2013
wonder if you can understand my jaw dropping sense that fraud lies at the very core of Hockey Stick Team claims, upon seeing my above described Marcott 2013 hockey stick links?:


And I wonder if you can sense the desperate, shrill keening sound your words invoke? You claiming fraud from another, hilarious!

Nov 20, 2013
Nik:
And last month Harvard's Willie Soon and Chris Monckton et al. have in peer review demolished their original, finding a true consensus of dangerous man made global warming to be 0.3%, using Cook's same data:
http://wattsupwit...-errors/

Yes Nik: you can create that result …. But only if you take the abstracts that make mention of AGW and work out a percentage of all the abstracts (12000). Err
You do actually need to take away from that 12000 the number of abstracts that take no position at all. ~66% of abstracts didn't take a position on the causes of GW, for various reasons (e.g. not relevant to or a key component of their specific research paper). So in order to estimate the consensus on human-caused global warming, it's necessary to focus on the abstracts that actually gave a position. If you don't know their position on the issue - that doesn't mean they endorse or reject the consensus position. See how that works. So the 0.3% is pure distorted and denialist bollocks.

Nov 20, 2013
I think NikfromNYC and the Vendicars, and probably a few others are the same person.
They have the pattern of diffusing by ranting, conversation promoting elucidation.

Nov 20, 2013
Thank you runrig, for an absolutely delightful video! I had to go on to listen to a few more, including some of Moncton's own offerings, and I have to state how predictable it is that Nik would quote him as a credible source.

Monty python indeed! (And I've heard the remaining members are getting together for a show as well! I am so excited!)

Nov 20, 2013
By gaming the ratings/reporting system on Phys.org, these sockpuppeteer Gorebots have ironically broken their usual ability to achieve easy bans of skeptics on news sites, here. The desperation reached a crescendo this year with several major news sites finally removing comments altogether (Popular Science) or censoring letters from "deniers" (LA Times).

An entire major web site exists just to character assassinate skeptics, DeSmogBlog.com, run by a greenie PR firm that was established by an online gambling money convicted fraudster who went on to sell solar panels (yep!).

Note how Maggnus desperately labels me a pedophile, then breathlessly cheers runrig about a YouTube video of early Monckton bloopers. These doomsday dedicate stalkers are in for the worst decade of their lives, and heck, I have little sympathy for those who again ironically created a huge skeptical movement exactly by being so nasty.

By *not* being so juvenile, skeptics are winning over whole political parties.

Nov 20, 2013
I think NikfromNYC and the Vendicars, and probably a few others are the same person.
They have the pattern of diffusing by ranting, conversation promoting elucidation.


Oh, you have to admit ownership of your own attack dog, Maggnus, and you are likely already full aware that your statement itself is utter misdirection, since any and all regulars here know VendicarE is a decade long textbook Internet troll that Google reveals via "Scott Nudds troll" going back to the 1990s.

In contrast, in the 1993/4 I appeared as -=Xenon=- on the early Internet, organizing a graphical interface project for the encryption program PGP back when yet another Congress was going crazy, trying to install hardware (Clipper Chips) backdoors into PCs:
https://groups.go...hPCdS2Ks

The contemporary liberal anti-NSA movement properly considers such early activism heroic.

You guys really are bitter enders, after Gore already cashed out and now Marcott 2013 etc!

Nov 20, 2013
runrig keeps this game up day after tiring day, furiously sketching his paper tiger that is no different in flavor than those terrible and banned greenhouse effect debunkers called "sky dragons" that represent skeptical folly:

"Tell me pray, how an ocean continually acts as a heat source on the atmosphere? without said atmosphere returning to the initial state?"

Reply: On a thousand year time scale, sure, why not? But you are insisting that Nature throw away any century scale variation even though former non-greenhouse spikes are clearly established and especially in Greenland that is the focus of this study, as I linked to references of above not to mention the warm spike-littered ice core record.

What you guys know well but smoke screen cover up is that hockey stick claims represented vast historical revisionism of deeply established and indeed consensus science! With former century *scale* peaks prior to emissions, your paper tiger is scrolled on toilet paper.

Nov 20, 2013
The main author of Monckton's debunking of Cook's 97% consensus claim, Dr. David Legates, served as state climatologist of Delaware.

Another coauthor, William M. Briggs is a seasoned (and fellow Manhattanite) statistician, something you will rarely find on Hockey Stick Team papers, for good reputation risking reason.

On the other hand Evangelical "Climate Justice" activist Cook lacks a Ph.D. in any physical science and spent over a decade as a semi-employed comic pane artist:
http://www.popula...nce.html

In 2005, said state climatologist and coauthor with former science advisor to a UK prime minister, was sacked for not adhering to the state doomsday religion.

Finally, as these link shy stalkers are wont to admit, I had a future Nobelist (Chalfie) and future Am. Chem. Soc. president (Breslow) on my Ph.D. committee and won the organic division top student award prior to three years at Harvard with Whitesides.

-=NikFromNYC=-

Nov 20, 2013
Note how Maggnus desperately labels me a pedophile,

No desperation necessary, the facts would seem to speak for themselves.
then breathlessly cheers runrig about a YouTube video of early Monckton bloopers

Breathlessly lol! How gauche! So apparently university level English escapes you too. Another tick in the "doesn't have a secondary education" column.
I have little sympathy for those who again ironically created a huge skeptical movement exactly by being so nasty.

A thorn by any other name is still a thorn. There is no "skeptical movement", at least not in the manner with which you use the term. There are a small (and ever shrinking) but loud cadre of denialists, contrarians and conspiracists, most of whom have a political axe to grind, and absolutely no empirical support. They Believe! You are just another fraud trying to take advantage of them. You're not even very good at it.

Nov 20, 2013
By *not* being so juvenile, skeptics are winning over whole political parties.


"Skeptics", the real ones, perform a valuable and necessary service, a check and counter balance to the claims of frauds and charlatans who use deceit, duplicitousness and fear to take advantage of those who, for whatever reason, do not take the time to learn for themselves. Just like you are trying (and failing) to do.

You have no clue what a skeptic is. You simply deny and pretend that means the same thing. News flash there skippy - it doesn't.

You are a fraud, a charlatan dressed in the robes of self-righteous fervor. You've admitted it! As to political parties (oh yes, fraud, you are definitely a tea partier) Lincoln had a saying about those who can be fooled.

Nov 20, 2013
The way I personally helped promote Climategate into the mainstream media was to utterly blanket in topical and polite fashion, nearly every conservative blog and comment ready news site with quick single glance infographics back in early 2009 so really, conservatives were already fully informed prior to the scandal without their having had to wade through millions of words about arcane statistics on skeptical blogs. Over time I threw out arguments that were embarrassingly hypothetical after all, searching for silver bullets instead. In 2013, the Hockey Stick Team of professionals merged with The Tree House club of hacks to provide skeptics with golden bullets.

They are now in full meltdown mode, Frankenstein science by spare time kids included. What no press? Where's the NY Times *this* time, kids? Alas, they burned reporter Revkin with the Marcott 2013 "super hockey stick" earlier this year. Oops!

Nov 20, 2013
Oh, you have to admit ownership of your own attack dog, Maggnus, and you are likely already full aware that your statement itself is utter misdirection, since any and all regulars here know VendicarE is a decade long textbook Internet troll that Google reveals via "Scott Nudds troll" going back to the 1990s


Yea, just more nonsense. You just love backing into pleas of oppression and censorship whenever you get pressed on being the criminal fraud you are. Poor little Nik, so hard done by. I bet within a post or two you'll don your mantle of self-righteous indignation, and claim to be some savior or bastion against the evil government or whatever power your diseased mind has leading the conspiracy.

You're just another gish-galloping fraudster, a Zephyr on the climate side of science, a nobody with an axe to grind. Bet you're good buddies with Manuel. Maybe soon you'll get to share a cell with him.

Nov 20, 2013

In contrast, in the 1993/4 I appeared as -=Xenon=- on the early Internet, organizing a graphical interface project for the encryption program PGP back when yet another Congress was going crazy, trying to install hardware (Clipper Chips) backdoors into PCs:
https://groups.go...hPCdS2Ks


BAHAHAHAHA didn't even make it to a new post! SO predictable, just a typical denialist wrapped in a cloak of righteous indignation. A Fraud!

Nov 20, 2013
I think NikfromNYC and the Vendicars, and probably a few others are the same person.
They have the pattern of diffusing by ranting, conversation promoting elucidation.

I think you ignore some rather obvious contrary indications.


I see your point, but their objectives and effects are identical.
Reality trumps opinion. The reality is they disrupt and calcify, rather than enlighten and free.

Nov 20, 2013
What if I *was* politically active, Maggnus?

As anybody can tell, I'm an equal opportunity political cynic, focusing on data and fraud.

But hold on, Maggnus, in fact *you* reveal near shrill tribalistic political intensity, by the very act of trying to denigrate me via politics. You guys project so much it's really almost endearing but more so comical: "you're definitely a tea partier."

On a *science* site, you are yammering on about the Tea Party as *if* it's a trump card. This makes you publicly guilty of your own accusation of having a political bias taint in your ability to sort facts!

You are textbook psychologically projecting.

I'm a formerly Whole Earth Catalog addicted trippy hippy, former lab mate of the recent Columbia chemistry department who was a classic Grateful Deadhead. I'm an atheist who despises conservative religious activism and stem cell bans, who despises Drug War red tape ruination of neuroscience, and am an established culture jamming old school cypherpunk.

Nov 20, 2013
runrig keeps this game up day after tiring day, furiously sketching his paper tiger that is no different in flavor than those terrible and banned greenhouse effect debunkers called "sky dragons" that represent skeptical folly:


Yet another glib response to the one person who gave you the benefit of the doubt and engaged you reasonably until you showed your true color. The knots you tied yourself in trying to keep up to someone who actually HAS a university education were amusing, if just a tad sad. You could not keep your duplicity, denialism and contrarianism in check even in the face of someone willing to listen and try to reason with you. (Not debate - it was never a debate because you know so little of science and the scientific method. More like guiding a petulant child)

That you would attempt to tar him with your poisoned brush just goes to show what a low life scum you are. AGREE with ME or PREPARE for the FIRES to take your VERY SOUL! And other such hogwash. Fraud.

Nov 20, 2013
I suspect Vendicar(E) is Michael Mann, venting. After all, Mann himself this year linked to comments here via Twitter, full of Emperor Vendicar(E), rar rar rar!

Nov 20, 2013
I see your point, but their objectives and effects are identical.
Reality trumps opinion. The reality is they disrupt and calcify, rather than enlighten and free.


Perhaps Alchemist. I have sat silent for a good while, reading the rhetoric of Nik and watching as his posts became shriller and shriller while runrig, djr, oracle and others (who deserve to be named but I can't think of right now), engaged him (mostly) politely. I and watched as he spammed more and more articles, setting himself up like some anti hero or whatever his particular illusion was. His lies and his attacks on those who gave him audience have moved me to speak my mind to him. To him Alchemist, the person who spams every article that comes up mentioning anything remotely close to global warming.

He is a fraud. He is a criminal. And he is trying to perpetrate his fraud on others. I do not fear saying what he is.

Nov 20, 2013
Maggnus The Magnificent: "That you would attempt to tar him with your poisoned brush just goes to show what a low life scum you are. AGREE with ME or PREPARE for the FIRES to take your VERY SOUL!"

Dude, maybe he's just wrong about the time scale of semi-chaotic natural variation.

Nov 20, 2013
I suspect Vendicar(E) is Michael Mann, venting. After all, Mann himself this year linked to comments here via Twitter, full of Emperor Vendicar(E), rar rar rar!


I only wish it was so. Unfortunately, Mann is a real scientist Nik, something you have never understood. He doesn't have time to listen to the petty misunderstandings of those such as you, as the reality of the situation requires his attention to the science, not the fantasy you are trying so hard to perpetuate.

You should take some time to learn how real scientists work Nik. Might enlighten you a bit.

Nov 20, 2013
Maggnus The Magnificent: "That you would attempt to tar him with your poisoned brush just goes to show what a low life scum you are. AGREE with ME or PREPARE for the FIRES to take your VERY SOUL!"

Dude, maybe he's just wrong about the time scale of semi-chaotic natural variation.


How would you know if he was Nik? You know nothing about climate science, or even science in general. You design lighting. Judging from your own words, you're seemingly a college drop-out and former drug addict caught in the throes of self hatred that you project as motive for others' attempts to discuss real science with you.

Your laughingly inept at science. Your motivation for wanting to appear otherwise is what is not clear.

Nov 20, 2013
O.K. guys, time out, in a *debate* you are supposed to *expose* lies, specific ones. You *lose* debate points when you merely group bond together and chant the mere word "lies" together as the other team fidgets.

All right, carry on, fellas, Al Gore is rooting for you from his yacht, you know the he bought, for when sea level rise renders his seaside palace naught.

Oh...and go get some physical science Ph.D.s!

Nov 20, 2013
As anybody can tell, I'm an equal opportunity political cynic, focusing on data and fraud.


Laughable! The only "equal" you offer is to agree with you or be damned. You focus on denial and contrarianism, because you don't know how to look at things any other way. You don't use critical thinking skills because you don't understand how they work and worse, they may cause you to take a second look at the pretend world you have convinced yourself exists.

Denialism is not skepticism skippy. You should try to learn the difference.

Nov 20, 2013
O.K. guys, time out, in a *debate* you are supposed to *expose* lies, specific ones. You *lose* debate points when you merely group bond together and chant the mere word "lies" together as the other team fidgets.

All right, carry on, fellas, Al Gore is rooting for you from his yacht, you know the he bought, for when sea level rise renders his seaside palace naught.

Oh...and go get some physical science Ph.D.s!


See you can't even get that right. Its not a debate skippy, the debate ended some 25 years ago. It's a handful of denialists trying desperately to convince someone, anyone, that they should be legitimized. Its people like you, shouting loudly about how oppressed they are while simultaneously stepping on the throat of anyone who dares point out that the Earth orbits the sun, not the other way around.

Most scientists don't even bother trying to correct your denialism and contrarianism because warming is so self evident, only those who will accept no evidence still argue

Nov 20, 2013
Maggnus, like the bulk of seasoned skeptics, I *did* use critical thinking skills in the three years I spent delving into Hockey Stick Team science. The process of concluding that here lied fraud instead of sincere science took place years ago now so indeed what you are mistaking for a lack of open mind is merely a hurried person's shortcuts in helping to expose that fraud.

In this very thread I'm harping on Marcott 2013, the latest famous hockey stick. The blade that was a mere spurious artifact was hailed as vindicating Mann, and I'm using it here as a lever to expose the blindness of Gore sponsored activism to even the most brazenly clear deceptions.

Your essential plea for a soft landing for climate "science" is noted, as you slander me, now in a pattern that represents growing and willful libel. I'm asking you now to discontinue defaming my hard earned credentials.