Remember me
▼ Content

Study: Global Warming Hiatus Attributed to Redistribution


Study: Global Warming Hiatus Attributed to Redistribution09-11-2017 00:24
James_
★★★☆☆
(637)
This is funny. Funny in as funny as it gets. Check the graph out. It seems to agree with the Greenland Sea abyss. Warming of the atmosphere has about stopped but warming of the oceans hasn't.
There is no agreement between the 2, why it's funny as all hell. They also go on to say
"The amount of heat absent from the atmosphere, which caused the global warming 'hiatus,' was extremely small compared to the amount of heat that was added to the ocean in the same time period," says Boyer.


Maybe the heat has always been there and they didn't notice it until they observed a global warming hiatus ?

https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/news/study-global-warming-hiatus-attributed-redistribution
Attached image:


Edited on 09-11-2017 00:25
09-11-2017 02:54
Into the Night
★★★★★
(4319)
James_ wrote:
This is funny. Funny in as funny as it gets. Check the graph out. It seems to agree with the Greenland Sea abyss. Warming of the atmosphere has about stopped but warming of the oceans hasn't.
There is no agreement between the 2, why it's funny as all hell. They also go on to say
"The amount of heat absent from the atmosphere, which caused the global warming 'hiatus,' was extremely small compared to the amount of heat that was added to the ocean in the same time period," says Boyer.


Maybe the heat has always been there and they didn't notice it until they observed a global warming hiatus ?

...deleted Holy Link...


More random numbers coming from NOAA.

It's not possible to determine the temperature of Earth. It is not possible to determine the temperature of the ocean. We just don't have sufficient instrumentation to even begin a statistical analysis.


The Parrot Killer
09-11-2017 03:27
litesong
★★★★☆
(1861)
"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner badnight" bluffed: It's not possible to determine...
Correction:
"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner badnight" can't determine. Scientists can determine.
09-11-2017 16:42
James_
★★★☆☆
(637)
Into the Night wrote:
James_ wrote:
This is funny. Funny in as funny as it gets. Check the graph out. It seems to agree with the Greenland Sea abyss. Warming of the atmosphere has about stopped but warming of the oceans hasn't.
There is no agreement between the 2, why it's funny as all hell. They also go on to say
"The amount of heat absent from the atmosphere, which caused the global warming 'hiatus,' was extremely small compared to the amount of heat that was added to the ocean in the same time period," says Boyer.


Maybe the heat has always been there and they didn't notice it until they observed a global warming hiatus ?

...deleted Holy Link...


More random numbers coming from NOAA.

It's not possible to determine the temperature of Earth. It is not possible to determine the temperature of the ocean. We just don't have sufficient instrumentation to even begin a statistical analysis.


ItN,
Maybe you don't like science ? We have sufficient instrumentation. What we might not have are the financial resources to map the thermal temperatures of our oceans.
The numbers given weren't random. I am surprised however that you ignored the fact that the laws of thermal dynamics do not allow for the atmosphere to have a fairly constant temperature while the oceans have warmed significantly.
The graph shows what is considered Maxwell's Demon https://www.auburn.edu/~smith01/notes/maxdem.htm. Maxwell used gases as an example.


Jim
09-11-2017 20:46
Into the Night
★★★★★
(4319)
James_ wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
More random numbers coming from NOAA.

It's not possible to determine the temperature of Earth. It is not possible to determine the temperature of the ocean. We just don't have sufficient instrumentation to even begin a statistical analysis.


ItN,
Maybe you don't like science ?

Not a science problem. It's a math problem.
James_ wrote:
We have sufficient instrumentation.

We do, eh? Okay. Answer the first question: How many official thermometers are in the world?
James_ wrote:
What we might not have are the financial resources to map the thermal temperatures of our oceans.

You think you can just ignore 7/10th's of the Earth's surface???
James_ wrote:
The numbers given weren't random.

Yes they are. They are of type randU.
James_ wrote:
I am surprised however that you ignored the fact that the laws of thermal dynamics do not allow for the atmosphere to have a fairly constant temperature

The laws of thermodynamics DO allow for the atmosphere to have a constant temperature. They also allow for the atmosphere to have a varying temperature, which it does.
James_ wrote:
while the oceans have warmed significantly.

Argument from randU. You don't know that. It is not possible to determine the temperature of the oceans.
James_ wrote:
The graph shows what is considered Maxwell's Demon https://www.auburn.edu/~smith01/notes/maxdem.htm. Maxwell used gases as an example.


Jim

Non-sequitur. Maxwell was trying to falsify the laws of thermodynamics via a thought experiment. He failed. The demon is an energy source. The 2nd law of thermodynamics is still a scientific a theory.


The Parrot Killer
Edited on 09-11-2017 20:53
09-11-2017 21:45
GasGuzzler
★★★☆☆
(791)
James wrote: ...the oceans have warmed significantly....


James, like it or not ITN is dead right about this. There is no way to determine the average ocean temperature. This was at 2:30 this afternoon in the southern tip of Florida. Notice the water temps varying by 2+ degrees over a 35 mile stretch? Now tell me how we possibly have enough data to claim we know the entire ocean temps. No way.
Attached image:


Edited on 09-11-2017 22:29
10-11-2017 01:08
James_
★★★☆☆
(637)
GasGuzzler wrote:
James wrote: ...the oceans have warmed significantly....


James, like it or not ITN is dead right about this. There is no way to determine the average ocean temperature. This was at 2:30 this afternoon in the southern tip of Florida. Notice the water temps varying by 2+ degrees over a 35 mile stretch? Now tell me how we possibly have enough data to claim we know the entire ocean temps. No way.


gasguzzler,
ItN only wants to mess with people. I think science is too complex for him. To let you know, a satellite can determine how much emissivity the surface of the oceans has.
We probably need to collect more data on currents and temperatures below the surface. This could help to identify any thermal vents or deep faults that are releasing a significant amount of heat.
10-11-2017 01:26
GasGuzzler
★★★☆☆
(791)
James_ wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
James wrote: ...the oceans have warmed significantly....


James, like it or not ITN is dead right about this. There is no way to determine the average ocean temperature. This was at 2:30 this afternoon in the southern tip of Florida. Notice the water temps varying by 2+ degrees over a 35 mile stretch? Now tell me how we possibly have enough data to claim we know the entire ocean temps. No way.


gasguzzler,
ItN only wants to mess with people. I think science is too complex for him. To let you know, a satellite can determine how much emissivity the surface of the oceans has.
We probably need to collect more data on currents and temperatures below the surface. This could help to identify any thermal vents or deep faults that are releasing a significant amount of heat.


Sure, but anyone claiming to know the average temp of the oceans is clearly full of hooey.
10-11-2017 02:07
James_
★★★☆☆
(637)
GasGuzzler wrote:
James_ wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
James wrote: ...the oceans have warmed significantly....


James, like it or not ITN is dead right about this. There is no way to determine the average ocean temperature. This was at 2:30 this afternoon in the southern tip of Florida. Notice the water temps varying by 2+ degrees over a 35 mile stretch? Now tell me how we possibly have enough data to claim we know the entire ocean temps. No way.


gasguzzler,
ItN only wants to mess with people. I think science is too complex for him. To let you know, a satellite can determine how much emissivity the surface of the oceans has.
We probably need to collect more data on currents and temperatures below the surface. This could help to identify any thermal vents or deep faults that are releasing a significant amount of heat.


Sure, but anyone claiming to know the average temp of the oceans is clearly full of hooey.


And yet somehow your computer is reliable. It converts frequencies into the spin of a cluster so it can store information. Checkout spintronics. [url]https://newatlas.com/first-plastic-spintronic-computer-memory-device/15989/ [/url] That requires much greater detail than observing the average ocean surface temperature.
10-11-2017 02:51
Into the Night
★★★★★
(4319)
GasGuzzler wrote:
James wrote: ...the oceans have warmed significantly....


James, like it or not ITN is dead right about this. There is no way to determine the average ocean temperature. This was at 2:30 this afternoon in the southern tip of Florida. Notice the water temps varying by 2+ degrees over a 35 mile stretch? Now tell me how we possibly have enough data to claim we know the entire ocean temps. No way.


The gradient is even worse than that. Look at the two buoys at Key Largo and the one just west of it by about five miles. They read 81.9 and 80.2, respectively. That's a difference of 1.7 degF over five miles.


The Parrot Killer
10-11-2017 02:55
Into the Night
★★★★★
(4319)
James_ wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
James wrote: ...the oceans have warmed significantly....


James, like it or not ITN is dead right about this. There is no way to determine the average ocean temperature. This was at 2:30 this afternoon in the southern tip of Florida. Notice the water temps varying by 2+ degrees over a 35 mile stretch? Now tell me how we possibly have enough data to claim we know the entire ocean temps. No way.


gasguzzler,
ItN only wants to mess with people. I think science is too complex for him. To let you know, a satellite can determine how much emissivity the surface of the oceans has.

Nope. A satellite cannot measure emissivity of anything. To measure emissivity, you must first accurately know the temperature of the surface being measured. Emissivity varies dramatically in the space of fractions of an inch on Earth. It's as dramatic as black lettering on a white sign.
James_ wrote:
We probably need to collect more data on currents and temperatures below the surface. This could help to identify any thermal vents or deep faults that are releasing a significant amount of heat.

Now you're getting desperate. You're willing to come up with any reason to make your bad math work.


The Parrot Killer
10-11-2017 02:56
Into the Night
★★★★★
(4319)
James_ wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
James_ wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
James wrote: ...the oceans have warmed significantly....


James, like it or not ITN is dead right about this. There is no way to determine the average ocean temperature. This was at 2:30 this afternoon in the southern tip of Florida. Notice the water temps varying by 2+ degrees over a 35 mile stretch? Now tell me how we possibly have enough data to claim we know the entire ocean temps. No way.


gasguzzler,
ItN only wants to mess with people. I think science is too complex for him. To let you know, a satellite can determine how much emissivity the surface of the oceans has.
We probably need to collect more data on currents and temperatures below the surface. This could help to identify any thermal vents or deep faults that are releasing a significant amount of heat.


Sure, but anyone claiming to know the average temp of the oceans is clearly full of hooey.


And yet somehow your computer is reliable. It converts frequencies into the spin of a cluster so it can store information. Checkout spintronics. [url]https://newatlas.com/first-plastic-spintronic-computer-memory-device/15989/ [/url] That requires much greater detail than observing the average ocean surface temperature.


Non-sequitur.

Computer memory is not temperature.


The Parrot Killer
10-11-2017 03:43
GasGuzzler
★★★☆☆
(791)
Into the Night wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
James wrote: ...the oceans have warmed significantly....


James, like it or not ITN is dead right about this. There is no way to determine the average ocean temperature. This was at 2:30 this afternoon in the southern tip of Florida. Notice the water temps varying by 2+ degrees over a 35 mile stretch? Now tell me how we possibly have enough data to claim we know the entire ocean temps. No way.


The gradient is even worse than that. Look at the two buoys at Key Largo and the one just west of it by about five miles. They read 81.9 and 80.2, respectively. That's a difference of 1.7 degF over five miles.


Yep, just wanted a bit wider area with a high buoy count to show the consistency of the inconsistency.
10-11-2017 04:10
Into the Night
★★★★★
(4319)
GasGuzzler wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
James wrote: ...the oceans have warmed significantly....


James, like it or not ITN is dead right about this. There is no way to determine the average ocean temperature. This was at 2:30 this afternoon in the southern tip of Florida. Notice the water temps varying by 2+ degrees over a 35 mile stretch? Now tell me how we possibly have enough data to claim we know the entire ocean temps. No way.


The gradient is even worse than that. Look at the two buoys at Key Largo and the one just west of it by about five miles. They read 81.9 and 80.2, respectively. That's a difference of 1.7 degF over five miles.


Yep, just wanted a bit wider area with a high buoy count to show the consistency of the inconsistency.


Quite right. Thanks for looking it up.


The Parrot Killer
10-11-2017 04:42
James_
★★★☆☆
(637)
Into the Night wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
James wrote: ...the oceans have warmed significantly....


James, like it or not ITN is dead right about this. There is no way to determine the average ocean temperature. This was at 2:30 this afternoon in the southern tip of Florida. Notice the water temps varying by 2+ degrees over a 35 mile stretch? Now tell me how we possibly have enough data to claim we know the entire ocean temps. No way.


The gradient is even worse than that. Look at the two buoys at Key Largo and the one just west of it by about five miles. They read 81.9 and 80.2, respectively. That's a difference of 1.7 degF over five miles.


Yep, just wanted a bit wider area with a high buoy count to show the consistency of the inconsistency.


Quite right. Thanks for looking it up.


You two are funny. 80.2 + 81.9 = 162.1
162.1 ÷ 2 = 81.05. That's AVERAGE temperature. How do you get an average ? By adding all of the different temperatures together and then dividing. You have shown that the data is being collected.
I'm surprised gasguzzler that you'd make such a basic mistake. It seems like ItN you only wish to be contrary.
10-11-2017 07:51
Into the Night
★★★★★
(4319)
James_ wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
James wrote: ...the oceans have warmed significantly....


James, like it or not ITN is dead right about this. There is no way to determine the average ocean temperature. This was at 2:30 this afternoon in the southern tip of Florida. Notice the water temps varying by 2+ degrees over a 35 mile stretch? Now tell me how we possibly have enough data to claim we know the entire ocean temps. No way.


The gradient is even worse than that. Look at the two buoys at Key Largo and the one just west of it by about five miles. They read 81.9 and 80.2, respectively. That's a difference of 1.7 degF over five miles.


Yep, just wanted a bit wider area with a high buoy count to show the consistency of the inconsistency.


Quite right. Thanks for looking it up.


You two are funny. 80.2 + 81.9 = 162.1
162.1 ÷ 2 = 81.05. That's AVERAGE temperature. How do you get an average ? By adding all of the different temperatures together and then dividing. You have shown that the data is being collected.
I'm surprised gasguzzler that you'd make such a basic mistake. It seems like ItN you only wish to be contrary.


That is not the statistical average temperature. You have failed to calculate the margin of error. You have failed to select by randN, independent of influencing factors. You have failed to normalize against a paired randR. You have committed the rather error known in statistics as selection by opportunity.

If you are going to produce a statistical summary, you MUST calculate the margin of error.


The Parrot Killer
10-11-2017 14:42
GasGuzzler
★★★☆☆
(791)
James_ wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
James wrote: ...the oceans have warmed significantly....


James, like it or not ITN is dead right about this. There is no way to determine the average ocean temperature. This was at 2:30 this afternoon in the southern tip of Florida. Notice the water temps varying by 2+ degrees over a 35 mile stretch? Now tell me how we possibly have enough data to claim we know the entire ocean temps. No way.


The gradient is even worse than that. Look at the two buoys at Key Largo and the one just west of it by about five miles. They read 81.9 and 80.2, respectively. That's a difference of 1.7 degF over five miles.


Yep, just wanted a bit wider area with a high buoy count to show the consistency of the inconsistency.


Quite right. Thanks for looking it up.


You two are funny. 80.2 + 81.9 = 162.1
162.1 ÷ 2 = 81.05. That's AVERAGE temperature. How do you get an average ? By adding all of the different temperatures together and then dividing. You have shown that the data is being collected.
I'm surprised gasguzzler that you'd make such a basic mistake. It seems like ItN you only wish to be contrary.


James,
If all the temp reading were within .1 I might be inclined to say that your average was approaching accuracy....for the southern tip of Florida ocean surface temps.

What is the temp 2 ft down? 3ft? 10ft? 50....10,000 ft?
This particular area has a relatively high buoy reading density, and I've simply shown the high level of variation over a short distance of surface water temperatures.
To say that global ocean average temps are rising is more ridiculous than saying Greenman is of sound mind.
Edited on 10-11-2017 14:49
10-11-2017 15:07
James_
★★★☆☆
(637)
GasGuzzler wrote:
James_ wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
Into the Night wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
James wrote: ...the oceans have warmed significantly....


James, like it or not ITN is dead right about this. There is no way to determine the average ocean temperature. This was at 2:30 this afternoon in the southern tip of Florida. Notice the water temps varying by 2+ degrees over a 35 mile stretch? Now tell me how we possibly have enough data to claim we know the entire ocean temps. No way.


The gradient is even worse than that. Look at the two buoys at Key Largo and the one just west of it by about five miles. They read 81.9 and 80.2, respectively. That's a difference of 1.7 degF over five miles.


Yep, just wanted a bit wider area with a high buoy count to show the consistency of the inconsistency.


Quite right. Thanks for looking it up.


You two are funny. 80.2 + 81.9 = 162.1
162.1 ÷ 2 = 81.05. That's AVERAGE temperature. How do you get an average ? By adding all of the different temperatures together and then dividing. You have shown that the data is being collected.
I'm surprised gasguzzler that you'd make such a basic mistake. It seems like ItN you only wish to be contrary.


James,
If all the temp reading were within .1 I might be inclined to say that your average was approaching accuracy....for the southern tip of Florida ocean surface temps.

What is the temp 2 ft down? 3ft? 10ft? 50....10,000 ft?
This particular area has a relatively high buoy reading density, and I've simply shown the high level of variation over a short distance of surface water temperatures.
To say that global ocean average temps are rising is more ridiculous than saying Greenman is of sound mind.


gasguzzler,
The only thing you and ItN is being is difficult. Neither of you get it because of that. If the ocean has been warming since the atmosphere slowed it's warming enough for it to be considered a pause, what is pumping the heat into the oceans ? Maxwell has demonstrated with his "demon" that thermodynamics is being violated.
And as I said, if by monitoring the oceans surface temperature an area of warming is noticed then that warming can be followed to it's source. There are buoys in the ocean for monitoring surface temperature. More may be needed since they will flow with the current on the surface.
You see, if you wanted to anchor sensors to a specific location, the Pacific can be over a mile deep. This is where looking for places on the surface that either warm or cool before other areas would be important. With thermohaline circulation temperatures would be fairly constant unless something happens to change them.
10-11-2017 15:37
GasGuzzler
★★★☆☆
(791)
James wrote:....If the ocean has been warming.....


James, you've got to stop right there. You're getting ahead of yourself. First tell us how the entire ocean temp is measured accurately, before telling us that the temp is rising. I say there's no way, but happy to look at any claim otherwise.

I showed temp variation of 2+ degrees over 35 miles...on the surface. The Pacific Ocean is ~10,000 MILES WIDE, and at some points over 35,000 ft deep! I'm not going down there for a reading!
10-11-2017 16:54
litesong
★★★★☆
(1861)
"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner & many time threatener gazzzed & guzzzling" gushed:... over 35,000 ft deep! I'm not going down there for a reading!
"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner & many time threatener gazzzed & guzzzling" descends a lot further to support other old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner & many time threateners.
10-11-2017 17:15
James_
★★★☆☆
(637)
GasGuzzler wrote:
James wrote:....If the ocean has been warming.....


James, you've got to stop right there. You're getting ahead of yourself. First tell us how the entire ocean temp is measured accurately, before telling us that the temp is rising. I say there's no way, but happy to look at any claim otherwise.

I showed temp variation of 2+ degrees over 35 miles...on the surface. The Pacific Ocean is ~10,000 MILES WIDE, and at some points over 35,000 ft deep! I'm not going down there for a reading!


gasguzzler,
What was my quote that you used ? If the ocean has been warming.
And what are you saying ?
GasGuzzler wrote:
before telling us that the temp is rising.


I never said it was rising. I said IF it was.
And yet you say
GasGuzzler wrote:
I say there's no way, but happy to look at any claim otherwise.


You haven't been willing to consider NOAA's claim. I did mention that it violates the laws of thermodynamics.
And all you want to do is play games like ItN does. I see you have learned from him. If you want to argue with someone over nothing why not try politics ? That's not based on anything but an opinion.
10-11-2017 17:50
James_
★★★☆☆
(637)
@All,
What ItN and gasguzzler are ignoring because they want to argue with someone is this,

NOAA will be found to be in agreement with the IPCC when they say that there has been minimal atmospheric warming since 1998. And during this time co2 levels have continued to rise while ozone depletion has about stopped.
That's the picture the graph in my 1st post helps to paint.
10-11-2017 19:42
Into the Night
★★★★★
(4319)
James_ wrote:
gasguzzler,
The only thing you and ItN is being is difficult. Neither of you get it because of that. If the ocean has been warming since the atmosphere slowed it's warming enough for it to be considered a pause, what is pumping the heat into the oceans ?

There is no 'heat pump'. Oceans are warmed by the Sun. They are cooled by radiance and conduction with the air.
James_ wrote:
Maxwell has demonstrated with his "demon" that thermodynamics is being violated.

Go read up on Maxwell's Demon. You seem unaware of what that is. It does not falsify thermodynamics.
James_ wrote:
And as I said, if by monitoring the oceans surface temperature an area of warming is noticed then that warming can be followed to it's source.

The source of warming ocean water is sunlight and maybe some volcanic activity here and there.
James_ wrote:
There are buoys in the ocean for monitoring surface temperature. More may be needed since they will flow with the current on the surface.

We can't build enough buoys to determine the temperature of the oceans. We don't have enough manufacturing and launch capability.
James_ wrote:
This is where looking for places on the surface that either warm or cool before other areas would be important. With thermohaline circulation temperatures would be fairly constant unless something happens to change them.

Buzzword. Ocean currents are there because of uneven heating of ocean water. It is because ocean water is DIFFERENT temperatures.


The Parrot Killer
10-11-2017 19:45
Into the Night
★★★★★
(4319)
James_ wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
James wrote:....If the ocean has been warming.....


James, you've got to stop right there. You're getting ahead of yourself. First tell us how the entire ocean temp is measured accurately, before telling us that the temp is rising. I say there's no way, but happy to look at any claim otherwise.

I showed temp variation of 2+ degrees over 35 miles...on the surface. The Pacific Ocean is ~10,000 MILES WIDE, and at some points over 35,000 ft deep! I'm not going down there for a reading!


gasguzzler,
What was my quote that you used ? If the ocean has been warming.
And what are you saying ?
GasGuzzler wrote:
before telling us that the temp is rising.


I never said it was rising. I said IF it was.
And yet you say
GasGuzzler wrote:
I say there's no way, but happy to look at any claim otherwise.


You haven't been willing to consider NOAA's claim. I did mention that it violates the laws of thermodynamics.
And all you want to do is play games like ItN does. I see you have learned from him. If you want to argue with someone over nothing why not try politics ? That's not based on anything but an opinion.


You're a liar, dude. You have made the claim that the oceans are warming quite a few times. Don't deny it.


The Parrot Killer
10-11-2017 19:56
Into the Night
★★★★★
(4319)
James_ wrote:
@All,
What ItN and gasguzzler are ignoring because they want to argue with someone is this,

NOAA will be found to be in agreement with the IPCC when they say that there has been minimal atmospheric warming since 1998.

It is not possible to determine the temperature of the Earth, it's atmosphere, or it's oceans.
James_ wrote:
And during this time co2 levels have continued to rise

No, the CO2 levels reported by Mauna Loa have continued to rise.
James_ wrote:
while ozone depletion has about stopped.

It never started.
James_ wrote:
That's the picture the graph in my 1st post helps to paint.

You then went on to describe the ocean temperature is rising, the atmospheric is rising, and that the ozone layer is being depleted.

You're a liar.


The Parrot Killer
10-11-2017 21:59
James_
★★★☆☆
(637)
Into the Night wrote:

You then went on to describe the ocean temperature is rising, the atmospheric is rising, and that the ozone layer is being depleted.

You're a liar.


You falsified me as a person. Since I am falsified I do not matter, my existence does not matter. And I cannot die since I do not exist. And since I neither exist or am I cannot lie as I cannot stand. This is because I am not.

ItN, your ignorant rants do get old. You've said you dislike Europeans because of what they did to Native Americans. What more needs to be said for why you wish to be contrary and argumentative ?
And ItN, like gasguzzler you're only looking to argue with someone. I mean really. gasguzzler said the station in Michigan has shown no atmospheric warming. I show something from NOAA and the IPCC that agrees with that and then like you he attacks me personally. That kind of suggests it's a waste of time posting with either of you because you both like circular arguments where you can play mind games with someone.
And ItN, the graph pretty much agrees with what I have been considering. The waring of our oceans which the graph says is happening can be caused by hydrothermal vents and deep faults in or on the sea floor. at the mment I am not discussing that but the claim that NOAA, the IPCC and you have made, that our Sun can warm our oceans without warming our atmosphere. Won't happen, thermodynamics doesn't allow for that.
And ItN, you might as well put aside your hatred for white people. You're wasting your life thinking you're doing something for Native Americans when you're in here being nothing more than a problem.
Edited on 10-11-2017 22:33
10-11-2017 23:27
Into the Night
★★★★★
(4319)
James_ wrote:
Into the Night wrote:

You then went on to describe the ocean temperature is rising, the atmospheric is rising, and that the ozone layer is being depleted.

You're a liar.


You falsified me as a person.

No, I called you a liar. You are.
James_ wrote:
Since I am falsified I do not matter, my existence does not matter. And I cannot die since I do not exist. And since I neither exist or am I cannot lie as I cannot stand. This is because I am not.

Strange loop fallacy.
James_ wrote:
ItN, your ignorant rants do get old.

Maybe you should stop making the same errors.
James_ wrote:
You've said you dislike Europeans because of what they did to Native Americans. What more needs to be said for why you wish to be contrary and argumentative ?

Never did say that. You are lying again.
James_ wrote:
And ItN, like gasguzzler you're only looking to argue with someone. I mean really.

Inversion fallacy. It is YOU that is making the same errors over and over.
James_ wrote:
gasguzzler said the station in Michigan has shown no atmospheric warming.

For that station, that is true. The atmosphere around that station has not warmed.
James_ wrote:
I show something from NOAA and the IPCC that agrees with that and then like you he attacks me personally.

Pointing out that it is not possible to determine the temperature of the Earth is not a personal attack. You are lying again. THAT's a personal attack, liar.
James_ wrote:
That kind of suggests it's a waste of time posting with either of you because you both like circular arguments

Math is not a circular argument. You are lying yet AGAIN.
James_ wrote:
where you can play mind games with someone.

No one is playing mind games with you. Inversion fallacy. You are lying yet AGAIN.
James_ wrote:
And ItN, the graph pretty much agrees with what I have been considering.

It is not possible to determine the temperature of the Earth, the atmosphere, or the oceans. The graph is essentially random numbers of type randU.
James_ wrote:
The waring of our oceans which the graph says is happening can be caused by hydrothermal vents and deep faults in or on the sea floor.

It is not possible to determine the temperature of the oceans.
James_ wrote:
at the mment I am not discussing that but the claim that NOAA, the IPCC and you have made, that our Sun can warm our oceans without warming our atmosphere.

It is sunlight that warms our oceans. Only sunlight. Our atmosphere is not an energy source.
James_ wrote:
Won't happen, thermodynamics doesn't allow for that.

The Sun...it is hotter than the Earth...you don't think it can warm the Earth???
James_ wrote:
And ItN, you might as well put aside your hatred for white people. You're wasting your life thinking you're doing something for Native Americans when you're in here being nothing more than a problem.

I don't hate white people. I am not a racist. Math and science are not a 'problem'. You are lying yet AGAIN.


The Parrot Killer
10-11-2017 23:43
James_
★★★☆☆
(637)
ItN,
In my opinion you are racist. After all many Native Americans are living on reservations or just dislike living in a way that allows for more people to have a life.
A lot of what you post has nothing to do with discussing anything. It could be your way of falsifying someone, ie., Make them a non person by using your education in philosophy to rationalize that they are not capable of thinking which means I do not think, therefore I am not. Your responses to people in my opinion nullifies their existence in your mind.
11-11-2017 00:48
litesong
★★★★☆
(1861)
James_ wrote: ItN,.... In my opinion you are racist.
James.... Ah, what part of the name, "old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner badnight", told you it was racist?
Edited on 11-11-2017 00:49
11-11-2017 02:30
James_
★★★☆☆
(637)
litesong wrote:
James_ wrote: ItN,.... In my opinion you are racist.
James.... Ah, what part of the name, "old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner badnight", told you it was racist?


As I said, it is my opinion. I have no need to prove it.
@All, anything beyond my opinion becomes slander. I would have preferred discussing how scientists say we have record warming when very little of it is atmospheric warming. This suggests that CO2 hasn't been the cause of global warming. Have the scientists said how much CO2 levels in the oceans have increased ?
They haven't. Because if they did and attributed it to having caused the oceans to warm then why did atmospheric warming slow so much ?
But the individual in question wishes to discuss opinions. Opinions require no basis, they're a thought an individual has that may or may not be correct.
And I do have better things to do than to discuss someone's opinion. Kind of why I can think that the IPCC and other climate scientists are playing with the books the same way Enron did. That's an opinion I have but I can't prove that even though science is based on cause and effect.
Edited on 11-11-2017 02:57
11-11-2017 02:53
Into the Night
★★★★★
(4319)
James_ wrote:
ItN,
In my opinion you are racist. After all many Native Americans are living on reservations or just dislike living in a way that allows for more people to have a life.
A lot of what you post has nothing to do with discussing anything. It could be your way of falsifying someone, ie., Make them a non person by using your education in philosophy to rationalize that they are not capable of thinking which means I do not think, therefore I am not. Your responses to people in my opinion nullifies their existence in your mind.


Strange loop fallacy. Redefinition fallacy. Fallacy fallacy. Bigotry.

Attempted redefinition of 'strange loop' as 'compositional error'.


The Parrot Killer
11-11-2017 10:25
Tim the plumber
★★★☆☆
(956)
James_ wrote:
This is funny. Funny in as funny as it gets. Check the graph out. It seems to agree with the Greenland Sea abyss. Warming of the atmosphere has about stopped but warming of the oceans hasn't.
There is no agreement between the 2, why it's funny as all hell. They also go on to say
"The amount of heat absent from the atmosphere, which caused the global warming 'hiatus,' was extremely small compared to the amount of heat that was added to the ocean in the same time period," says Boyer.


Maybe the heat has always been there and they didn't notice it until they observed a global warming hiatus ?

https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/news/study-global-warming-hiatus-attributed-redistribution


Given that a 200ZJ adding of heat to the ocean will produce a 0.2c rise intemperature, assuming it is spread over the top 700m of ocean, that would be easily detectable.

There has been no such large general rise in ocean temperatures.

Thus bollocks.

Edited on 11-11-2017 10:26
11-11-2017 15:53
litesong
★★★★☆
(1861)
"old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner badnight" bluffed: You're a liar.....
One of your favorite traits, so much so, its in your name, "old sick silly sleepy sleezy slimy steenkin' filthy vile reprobate rooting (& rotting) racist pukey proud pig AGW denier liar whiner badnight". As always, the ego of "badnight" tells it, if it can't do the science, no scientists can do the science. In truth, "badnight" is only posting about its "sigh-ants".
11-11-2017 19:04
James_
★★★☆☆
(637)
Tim the plumber wrote:
James_ wrote:
This is funny. Funny in as funny as it gets. Check the graph out. It seems to agree with the Greenland Sea abyss. Warming of the atmosphere has about stopped but warming of the oceans hasn't.
There is no agreement between the 2, why it's funny as all hell. They also go on to say
"The amount of heat absent from the atmosphere, which caused the global warming 'hiatus,' was extremely small compared to the amount of heat that was added to the ocean in the same time period," says Boyer.


Maybe the heat has always been there and they didn't notice it until they observed a global warming hiatus ?

https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/news/study-global-warming-hiatus-attributed-redistribution


Given that a 200ZJ adding of heat to the ocean will produce a 0.2c rise in temperature, assuming it is spread over the top 700m of ocean, that would be easily detectable.

There has been no such large general rise in ocean temperatures.

Thus bollocks.


Thank you Tim. I thought wrongly when I thought that Wake or gasguzzler would find this interesting. After all co2 is supposed to be causing climate change. What NOAA has shown is that there is no agreement between atmospheric warming and rising co2 levels.




Join the debate Study: Global Warming Hiatus Attributed to Redistribution:

Remember me

Related content
ThreadsRepliesLast post
study on how climate science is being perceived1725-11-2016 03:29
Small volcanic eruptions partly explain 'warming hiatus'711-10-2015 17:52
▲ Top of page
Public Poll
Will Arctic summers be ice-free in this century?

Yes

No

Don't know


Thanks for supporting Climate-Debate.com.
Copyright © 2009-2017 Climate-Debate.com | About | Contact