New High Temperature Records Again Outpace Lows

Climate-Debate.com > Discussion Forum > Climate debate in general > New High Temperature Records Again Outpace Lows

New High Temperature Records Again Outpace Lows17-07-2020 13:59
DRKTS ★★☆☆☆ (305)	In the last week, there were 1355 new global record high temperatures set while only 149 new record lows were set. A ratio of 9 to 1. https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/cdo-web/datatools/records When the Earth warms the bell curve of the temperature distribution shifts to higher temperatures making record highs more likely than record lows. It seems to be happening week after week, until only the trolls with politically and/or financially motivated trolls can deny the Earth is warming.
17-07-2020 15:13
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14476)	DRATS wrote:When the Earth warms the bell curve of the temperature distribution shifts to higher temperatures making record highs more likely than record lows. In the absence of any evidence of their religious prophecy coming true, devout but desperate warmizombies selectively report data in the hopes that the sheer strength of their faith will be enough to warp reality to into a catastrophic demise of the planet. @DRATS, let me know how this is working out for you. @Everyone else, let me know if what DRATS did above worked on you, i.e. was effective in convincing you that "Global Warming is real and active in our lives!" .
17-07-2020 15:25
duncan61 ★★★★★ (2021)	What are the record highs record against.The hottest day in S.A.was in the 1930s and its never got close again.East Anglia records show a slight cooling since 1998.I know who I trust.
17-07-2020 16:06
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14476)	duncan61 wrote:I know who I trust. To be honest, it should never be a question of which personality you trust. You should always ask "Why should any rational person believe what you are selling?" and "What science do you have supporting your claim?" Any celebrity that you trust, or any famous institution or organization, puts a price tag on its endorsement of any product, program or religion ... and it's always a lot lower than you would expect. The reason science requires absolute falsifiability is that science is not subjective and is completely independent of any person's opinion. Whenever you hear phrases such as "scientific consensus," "mainstream science," "prevailing science opinion," etc ... you know you are dealing with opinions that are bought and forthwith paid. . I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist. The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank :sigh* Not the "raw data" crap.* - Leafsdude IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
17-07-2020 17:02
gfm7175★★★★★ (3314)	IBdaMann wrote: @Everyone else, let me know if what DRATS did above worked on you, i.e. was effective in convincing you that "Global Warming is real and active in our lives!" . It did not work on me. It did not convince me that Global Warming is real.

17-07-2020 17:05
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14476)	gfm7175 wrote: IBdaMann wrote: @Everyone else, let me know if what DRATS did above worked on you, i.e. was effective in convincing you that "Global Warming is real and active in our lives!" . It did not work on me. It did not convince me that Global Warming is real. Don't tell anyone but it didn't work on me either, but let's hold that close to the vest. . I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist. The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank :sigh* Not the "raw data" crap.* - Leafsdude IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
17-07-2020 18:36
HarveyH55★★★★★ (5197)	DRKTS wrote: In the last week, there were 1355 new global record high temperatures set while only 149 new record lows were set. A ratio of 9 to 1. https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/cdo-web/datatools/records When the Earth warms the bell curve of the temperature distribution shifts to higher temperatures making record highs more likely than record lows. It seems to be happening week after week, until only the trolls with politically and/or financially motivated trolls can deny the Earth is warming. Over how many years, are we going back, looking for record highs and lows? How many points around the world, total, were searched for apocalyptic signs of global warming? Thermometers were used starting 1898, but there weren't any where near 1355 of them. Satellite guesstimation started 1970(?). but a slightly higher margin of error, but you get more coverage. There are also a few thousand years worth of proxy temperatures, from ice core samples. Which I don't really understand, ice, is ice, it doesn't have a memory, and it should be around 32 F. Guess the numbers mean about the same, regardless of what dark hole you pull them from. If global warming was an actual thing, it would take so much work to sell. You would be scraping the bottom of the barrel, for something, anything, that can be used, to sell the product. A climatologist, is like the guy at the airport, trying to sell you his watch, 'cheap'. You don't need his watch, can't really afford what he's asking, but he just won't accept 'no', until he thinks you about to punch him up side his fool head, or he see another 'mark'. Probably wasn't even a genuine 'Bolex', either... Whether or not there is even going to be a couple degrees 'warming', over the next couple hundred years, big deal. It's still well within the tolerable range. Cold sucks, most species would agree. Cold is hard work for mammals, specifically. We burn a lot of calories, maintaining our body temperature. Unfortunately, plants don't grow well on the cold, so it's also a lot of work, feeding our need for calories. Cold is depressing and exhausting, kills you a lot quicker than hot summer day. Sort of why I moved to Florida about 35 years ago. The warmer climate, obviously didn't kill me yet. Seldom even wear a jacket in the winter. I will wear a shirt with long sleaves, and long pants, occasionally...
17-07-2020 22:44
Into the Night★★★★★ (21699)	DRKTS wrote: In the last week, there were 1355 new global record high temperatures set while only 149 new record lows were set. A ratio of 9 to 1. There are no global high temperature records. It is not possible to measure the temperature of the Earth. DRKTS wrote: ...deleted Holy Link... They can't measure the temperature of the Earth either. Random numbers are not data. DRKTS wrote: When the Earth warms the bell curve of the temperature distribution shifts to higher temperatures making record highs more likely than record lows. It is not possible to measure the temperature of the Earth. DRKTS wrote: It seems to be happening week after week, until only the trolls with politically and/or financially motivated trolls can deny the Earth is warming. It is not possible to measure the temperature of the Earth. It is not possible to create energy out of nothing. No argument presented. Denial of physics. Denial of statistical mathematics. Insult fallacy. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
17-07-2020 22:45
Into the Night★★★★★ (21699)	IBdaMann wrote: duncan61 wrote:I know who I trust. To be honest, it should never be a question of which personality you trust. You should always ask "Why should any rational person believe what you are selling?" and "What science do you have supporting your claim?" Any celebrity that you trust, or any famous institution or organization, puts a price tag on its endorsement of any product, program or religion ... and it's always a lot lower than you would expect. The reason science requires absolute falsifiability is that science is not subjective and is completely independent of any person's opinion. Whenever you hear phrases such as "scientific consensus," "mainstream science," "prevailing science opinion," etc ... you know you are dealing with opinions that are bought and forthwith paid. . Well said. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
18-07-2020 03:02
duncan61 ★★★★★ (2021)	I just had a look at the East Anglia uni website and the Climate Reasearch Group are in favour of the CO2 warming theory and the side effects off this however their research suggests that CO2 levels have leveled out since 2016 and its unlikely to increase.The planet sucks up a huge amount and we do not have enough stuff to burn to lift the level so crisis averted.I would like some input on this theory.The uni is funded regardless of results but US organisations NASA NOAA etc are government funded for research.Could this influence the results they post?
18-07-2020 03:25
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14476)	duncan61 wrote:The uni is funded regardless of results but US organisations NASA NOAA etc are government funded for research.Could this influence the results they post? The political agendas of the political appointees that run the organization determine the "results," not so much the funding. . I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist. The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank :sigh* Not the "raw data" crap.* - Leafsdude IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
06-08-2020 15:41
DRKTS ★★☆☆☆ (305)	duncan61 wrote: I just had a look at the East Anglia uni website and the Climate Reasearch Group are in favour of the CO2 warming theory and the side effects off this however their research suggests that CO2 levels have leveled out since 2016 and its unlikely to increase.The planet sucks up a huge amount and we do not have enough stuff to burn to lift the level so crisis averted. CO2 level have not "leveled off since 2016" see https://www.climate.gov/sites/default/files/CO2_emissions_vs_concentrations_1751-2019_lrg.gif I would like some input on this theory.The uni is funded regardless of results but US organisations NASA NOAA etc are government funded for research. Could this influence the results they post? No, because they are consistent about their results no matter which party controls the government
06-08-2020 19:24
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14476)	DRKTS wrote: CO2 level have not "leveled off since 2016" How do you know? You state this like you know. Let's say I don't believe you because you are a known liar, why should I accept this claim of omniscience on your part? Where's the raw data? I love to watch you twist yourself into a pretzel trying to find spurious excuses to avoid simply posting your raw data or your unambiguous definition of Climate. You clearly can't afford for it to be revealed that you don't have any valid raw data or unambiguous definition of Climate. DRKTS wrote: No, because they are consistent about their results no matter which party controls the government Right. When liars collude to get their stories straight ... that is sufficient to transform the lie into the truth. Funny how that works. Why don't you instead just post the raw data? I love to watch you twist yourself into a pretzel trying to find spurious excuses to avoid simply posting your raw data or your unambiguous definition of Climate. You clearly can't afford for it to be revealed that you don't have any valid raw data or unambiguous definition of Climate. . I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist. The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank :sigh* Not the "raw data" crap.* - Leafsdude IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
07-08-2020 02:55
Into the Night★★★★★ (21699)	duncan61 wrote: I just had a look at the East Anglia uni website and the Climate Reasearch Group are in favour of the CO2 warming theory and the side effects off this however their research suggests that CO2 levels have leveled out since 2016 and its unlikely to increase.The planet sucks up a huge amount and we do not have enough stuff to burn to lift the level so crisis averted.I would like some input on this theory.The uni is funded regardless of results but US organisations NASA NOAA etc are government funded for research.Could this influence the results they post? Yes. Government funding does indeed influence the results they post. This funding is pervasive. University research programs are locked into it in this country. It is a problem in other countries as well. Governments have a vested interest in keeping the Church of Global Warming alive. They can use it to justify any boondoggle to 'solve' the 'global warming crisis' and thus gain power. The first purpose of any government agency is to justify their own budgets. They do this by creating a 'crisis' to solve, without ever actually solving it. It doesn't matter if the 'crisis' is real or not, or whether it is really a 'problem' or not. They just make shit up. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
07-08-2020 02:57
Into the Night★★★★★ (21699)	DRKTS wrote: duncan61 wrote: I just had a look at the East Anglia uni website and the Climate Reasearch Group are in favour of the CO2 warming theory and the side effects off this however their research suggests that CO2 levels have leveled out since 2016 and its unlikely to increase.The planet sucks up a huge amount and we do not have enough stuff to burn to lift the level so crisis averted. CO2 level have not "leveled off since 2016" see https://www.climate.gov/sites/default/files/CO2_emissions_vs_concentrations_1751-2019_lrg.gif It is not possible to measure the global atmospheric content of CO2. CO2 is not uniformly distributed in the atmosphere. DRKTS wrote: I would like some input on this theory.The uni is funded regardless of results but US organisations NASA NOAA etc are government funded for research. Could this influence the results they post? No, because they are consistent about their results no matter which party controls the government It's not about party, twit. It's about justifying budgets. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan

07-08-2020 12:52
tmiddles★★★★★ (3979)	IBdaMann wrote: How do you know? ...Where's the raw data? So two things. Of course IBD's a total fraud with the mythic "Raw data" he has never defined or presented (not once), in my sig. The query "how can you know" is presented by a human (presumably) without an answer presented. So IBD do you know nothing? How do you know anything? You position has all of the depth and insight of a 5 year old saying "but why" after everything. Your "liars" theory falls apart as follows: Lying is always done for a reason. Clearly your alleged motive here is to advance the "global warming" agenda. The problem is that "global warming" as a concern/issue/agenda/theory did not even exist prior to mid century and was ignored until the 1980s. This is the classic FLAT EARTH style wild conspiracy theory. It hinges on the premise that the enemy perpetrating the lie is so all powerful they are able to do so not only without getting caught but without leaving a shred of evidence. If they are lying, go buy a CO2 meter and make the front page of every newspaper in the world with your revelation. "Good tests kill flawed theories; we remain alive to guess again." - Karl Popper ITN/IBD Fraud exposed: The 2nd LTD add on claiming radiance from cooler bodies can't be absorbed Max Planck debunks, they can't explain:net-thermal-radiation-you-in-a-room-as-a-reference & Proof: no data is valid for IBD or ITN Edited on 07-08-2020 13:00
07-08-2020 13:33
duncan61 ★★★★★ (2021)	I have bought a CO2 meter and will get it on the 12th.If the local CO2 is under 300ppm where I live does that mean crisis averted
07-08-2020 15:54
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14476)	duncan61 wrote:I have bought a CO2 meter and will get it on the 12th.If the local CO2 is under 300ppm where I live does that mean crisis averted Yes, it will mean "crisis averted" or "crisis never was." Of course I will take full credit for the "crisis averted." I will claim that James__ and I leveraged the Norwegian Jet Stream to repair the ozone hole and send the climate catastrophe packing. James__ and I will also be recipients of the coveted 25 bonus point award (unfortunately we'll have to share it) and Global Warming will be officially declared defunct. We are standing by. . I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist. The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank :sigh* Not the "raw data" crap.* - Leafsdude IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
07-08-2020 19:18
HarveyH55★★★★★ (5197)	Into the Night wrote: duncan61 wrote: I just had a look at the East Anglia uni website and the Climate Reasearch Group are in favour of the CO2 warming theory and the side effects off this however their research suggests that CO2 levels have leveled out since 2016 and its unlikely to increase.The planet sucks up a huge amount and we do not have enough stuff to burn to lift the level so crisis averted.I would like some input on this theory.The uni is funded regardless of results but US organisations NASA NOAA etc are government funded for research.Could this influence the results they post? Yes. Government funding does indeed influence the results they post. This funding is pervasive. University research programs are locked into it in this country. It is a problem in other countries as well. Governments have a vested interest in keeping the Church of Global Warming alive. They can use it to justify any boondoggle to 'solve' the 'global warming crisis' and thus gain power. The first purpose of any government agency is to justify their own budgets. They do this by creating a 'crisis' to solve, without ever actually solving it. It doesn't matter if the 'crisis' is real or not, or whether it is really a 'problem' or not. They just make shit up. Nothing in this world, is actually 'free'. Who ever is paying for it, usually has certain expectations, of the product or service. If they aren't satisfied, they aren't likely to continue to pay, or pay generously. I'm not sure when science, became a business, the results agreed on in advance, the research goal, is to provide anything, that can be acceptable to that goal, whether or not it's factual and true. Saw a good one on the local news this morning. Covid causes hair loss. I haven't searched yet, be the three people the interviewed, were all people who had to be hospitalized. Just guessing, but the hair loss, was probably trauma related, sort of like chemotherapy. Your body tends to shut down certain non-essential body functions, to better focus energy and resources, on the stuff fighting to keep you living. There are 186 similar observation, that need further study... Guess this is why the are pushing student loan forgiveness... Most scientific research is for profit anymore. Quite a bit, are scams for government grants, since they don't really need to produce any useful results, and have time and money for side-projects, semi-related, if they're smart about it. The government leaders change frequently, and shift spending around, so best to keep it interesting and relevant, some how.
07-08-2020 19:26
gfm7175★★★★★ (3314)	tmiddles wrote: IBdaMann wrote: How do you know? ...Where's the raw data? So two things. ... DELETED EGREGIOUS VIOLATION OF TMIDDLES ORDINANCE Summarily dismissed. Continued evasion of questions asked of you. Answer the questions.
08-08-2020 00:33
duncan61 ★★★★★ (2021)	tmiddles wrote: IBdaMann wrote: How do you know? ...Where's the raw data? So two things. Of course IBD's a total fraud with the mythic "Raw data" he has never defined or presented (not once), in my sig. The query "how can you know" is presented by a human (presumably) without an answer presented. So IBD do you know nothing? How do you know anything? You position has all of the depth and insight of a 5 year old saying "but why" after everything. Your "liars" theory falls apart as follows: Lying is always done for a reason. Clearly your alleged motive here is to advance the "global warming" agenda. The problem is that "global warming" as a concern/issue/agenda/theory did not even exist prior to mid century and was ignored until the 1980s. This is the classic FLAT EARTH style wild conspiracy theory. It hinges on the premise that the enemy perpetrating the lie is so all powerful they are able to do so not only without getting caught but without leaving a shred of evidence. If they are lying, go buy a CO2 meter and make the front page of every newspaper in the world with your revelation. "Good tests kill flawed theories; we remain alive to guess again." - Karl Popper ITN/IBD Fraud exposed: The 2nd LTD add on claiming radiance from cooler bodies can't be absorbed Max Planck debunks, they can't explain:net-thermal-radiation-you-in-a-room-as-a-reference & Proof: no data is valid for IBD or ITN There is a lot of evidence of tampering with the temperature data to the point the bureau of meteorology is now called the bureau of mythology.Its embarassing and gets swept under the carpet like yes minister.why can you not see this? duncan61
08-08-2020 03:28
gfm7175★★★★★ (3314)	duncan61 wrote: tmiddles wrote: IBdaMann wrote: How do you know? ...Where's the raw data? So two things. Of course IBD's a total fraud with the mythic "Raw data" he has never defined or presented (not once), in my sig. The query "how can you know" is presented by a human (presumably) without an answer presented. So IBD do you know nothing? How do you know anything? You position has all of the depth and insight of a 5 year old saying "but why" after everything. Your "liars" theory falls apart as follows: Lying is always done for a reason. Clearly your alleged motive here is to advance the "global warming" agenda. The problem is that "global warming" as a concern/issue/agenda/theory did not even exist prior to mid century and was ignored until the 1980s. This is the classic FLAT EARTH style wild conspiracy theory. It hinges on the premise that the enemy perpetrating the lie is so all powerful they are able to do so not only without getting caught but without leaving a shred of evidence. If they are lying, go buy a CO2 meter and make the front page of every newspaper in the world with your revelation. "Good tests kill flawed theories; we remain alive to guess again." - Karl Popper ITN/IBD Fraud exposed: The 2nd LTD add on claiming radiance from cooler bodies can't be absorbed Max Planck debunks, they can't explain:net-thermal-radiation-you-in-a-room-as-a-reference & Proof: no data is valid for IBD or ITN There is a lot of evidence of tampering with the temperature data to the point the bureau of meteorology is now called the bureau of mythology.Its embarassing and gets swept under the carpet like yes minister.why can you not see this? Because it's "what we know"... well, what HE knows in his omnicience... It's much easier to respond to him by calling him out for violating the tmiddles ordinance and reminding him that he has continually refused to answer questions that this board has asked of him... Notice how he leaves me alone now beyond making some vague references about me in comments to others?
31-08-2020 09:50
tmiddles★★★★★ (3979)	duncan61 wrote:...bureau of meteorology is now called the bureau of mythology....why can you not see this? Your CO2 meter acquisition makes the point better than anything I could say. We're talking about measurements taken from our own surroundings. So the ability to commit fraud will always be checked by that reality. The campaign to discredit the scientific community is broad (Covid being a great example). So can you see that? There is an agenda on both sides. But anyone can take measurements and proving fraud is very doable. gfm7175 wrote: Notice how he leaves me alone now... ? You never have anything to say to me GFM. How does one debate "summarily dismissed"? If you quite I can't fix that. "Good tests kill flawed theories; we remain alive to guess again." - Karl Popper ITN/IBD Fraud exposed: The 2nd LTD add on claiming radiance from cooler bodies can't be absorbed Max Planck debunks, they can't explain:net-thermal-radiation-you-in-a-room-as-a-reference & Proof: no data is valid for IBD or ITN Edited on 31-08-2020 09:50
31-08-2020 13:46
duncan61 ★★★★★ (2021)	I started a thread that showed the 3 requirements for AGW/CC to be possible.Having taken my own measurements I am happy to conclude that the CO2 Concentration within 100 kms of where I live is 380ppm - 420ppm.The next part of my search for the truth is to discover if that tiny amount can make a difference to global temperature.Willie Soon and Don Easterbrook have no issue with the amount of CO2 Their big deal is it does not matter.I can not go back in time and see what it was 1000 years ago and what would be the best amount for the planet?
31-08-2020 13:54
tmiddles★★★★★ (3979)	duncan61 wrote:Willie Soon and Don Easterbrook have no issue...I can not go back in time... And other reputable folks do have an issue. Not knowing ≠ Knowing it's Not We could be debating infection disease science two hundred years ago without the benefit of the science since (oh wait we are!!!) and pointing out that we don't know would have been a dead wrong way of concluding that germ and virus theory was baloney.
31-08-2020 17:19
gfm7175★★★★★ (3314)	tmiddles wrote: gfm7175 wrote: Notice how he leaves me alone now... ? You never have anything to say to me GFM. How does one debate "summarily dismissed"? If you quite I can't fix that. I summarily dismiss anything which violates the currently standing tmiddles ordinance, and I refuse to have a discussion with you about any of the topics contained within the list of unanswered questions for tmiddles until you are willing to answer those questions. To discuss a topic with you that you cannot and/or are unwilling to unambiguously define or further clarify/substantiate is rather pointless.
31-08-2020 19:48
Into the Night★★★★★ (21699)	tmiddles wrote: duncan61 wrote:...bureau of meteorology is now called the bureau of mythology....why can you not see this? Your CO2 meter acquisition makes the point better than anything I could say. We're talking about measurements taken from our own surroundings. So the ability to commit fraud will always be checked by that reality. The campaign to discredit the scientific community is broad (Covid being a great example). So can you see that? There is an agenda on both sides. Science isn't a community. It is a set of falsifiable theories. Covid19 is not science. It's a virus. tmiddles wrote: But anyone can take measurements and proving fraud is very doable. People are being sued right now on the fraudulent claims of death and infections due to covid19. Falsification of public records is a felony. tmiddles wrote: gfm7175 wrote: Notice how he leaves me alone now... ? You never have anything to say to me GFM. How does one debate "summarily dismissed"? If you quite I can't fix that. Answer the questions put to you. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
31-08-2020 19:53
Into the Night★★★★★ (21699)	tmiddles wrote: duncan61 wrote:Willie Soon and Don Easterbrook have no issue...I can not go back in time... And other reputable folks do have an issue. Science does not use consensus. You cannot discount one reputable person using another. tmiddles wrote: Not knowing ≠ Knowing it's Not Already addressed. tmiddles wrote: We could be debating infection disease science two hundred years ago without the benefit of the science since (oh wait we are!!!) and pointing out that we don't know would have been a dead wrong way of concluding that germ and virus theory was baloney. Conflation. Compositional error fallacy. No argument presented. Bulverism. Compositional error fallacy. Denial of science. Answer the questions put to you. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
01-09-2020 00:57
duncan61 ★★★★★ (2021)	I find Willie Soon and Don Easterbrook very believable and the pro scientists very not believable.I am working on discovering the truth.I am in phase 1 where I need to get CO2 levels correct then I need to see if at the current levels and placement anything is happening then if it is increasing Global temperatures is this bad and why.We were certainly a degree or 2 warmer in the 1930s and nothing bad happened.The warmazombies are trying to prove that it will all spiral out of control and people will die.Its 9 C at 6 am today and in January it will go as high as 42 C.It does not kill anyone
02-09-2020 03:20
tmiddles★★★★★ (3979)	Into the Night wrote: People are being sued right now on the fraudulent claims of death... So you think Herman Cain is actually holed up in a safe house somewhere? Such a VAST conspiracy without a motive ITN. duncan61 wrote: I find Willie Soon and Don Easterbrook very believable and the pro scientists very not believable.... However! you would acknowledge you happen to find the people telling you what you want to hear more pleasing to your ear yes?

02-09-2020 17:43
gfm7175★★★★★ (3314)	tmiddles wrote: Into the Night wrote: People are being sued right now on the fraudulent claims of death... So you think Herman Cain is actually holed up in a safe house somewhere? Such a VAST conspiracy without a motive ITN. Mantras 16c, 30, 35a. No valid argumentation presented.
02-09-2020 23:24
Into the Night★★★★★ (21699)	tmiddles wrote: Into the Night wrote: People are being sued right now on the fraudulent claims of death... So you think Herman Cain is actually holed up in a safe house somewhere? Such a VAST conspiracy without a motive ITN. duncan61 wrote: I find Willie Soon and Don Easterbrook very believable and the pro scientists very not believable.... However! you would acknowledge you happen to find the people telling you what you want to hear more pleasing to your ear yes? Mantras 16b...30c....35c... No argument presented. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan Edited on 02-09-2020 23:24

Join the debate New High Temperature Records Again Outpace Lows:

Threads	Replies	Last post
Can we trust the satellite and surface-based temperature records?	1	23-04-2024 16:21
Present temperature spike July '23	31	27-09-2023 00:27
Surface temperature of earth according to Boltzmann law	56	10-05-2023 15:46
Greenhouse gases cool better and cause lower surface temperature of earth than non greenhouse gases	3	10-05-2023 08:27
Low temperature breaks record set over 100 years ago, proving climate change is real	28	01-06-2022 06:03