8K Years of Temp Records

The Daily Caller? Really?

You remind me of kramarat, may his tortured soul rest in peace, with your choice of sources.

For every source you dig up to prove your point, I can dredge one up to prove yours is wrong, biased, slanted and paid to say whatever it is they want said.

100 years is not a long time.

And hiccoughs are a sure sign of imminent respiratory failure.

nice chart, looks like the world ends in 10 minutes, the atory was in Yahoo, this was just the link, I thought it was unbias

Yes, we're all going to die! On that I hope we can agree.

I'm just holding on until everyone else dies first just so I can have the last word.

You may want to record that, but wait. Who will be around to hear it?

You should say something profound now, while someone is still here to appreciate it.

Darn. I thought I had.

http://www.skepticalscience.com/co2-lags-temperature.htm

Unfortunately, none of us will be around long enough to say "I told you so", no matter which way the ice cube melts.

Lyn: OK, so there is CO2. There is also methane welling up from the ocean as marine fartulence. Both are so-called "green-house" gases. Well, it turns out that is half-right. They are in fact gases. There is no proof anywhere that shows that any gas can cause the so-called "greenhouse" effect. The original anologue was the atmosphere of Venus. Turns out that is a mist of sulphuric acid droplets. Totally different stuff, and totally different mechanism of operation.

There is no "green-cheese". There are lots of crooked politicians making lots of cheese off this non-starter issue. It has been milked to death. Why not let it rest in peace?

More likely is the true correlation found between sun-spot cycles and Earth mean global temperature. Go look it up (as certain people are quick to reply in here).

Wow. You weren't even trying, and you got my road flair all lit up.

LOL ....Quoting Philip Lloyd..? Let's just check this authority out....

http://blog.hotwhopper.com/2013/11/resurrecting-inhofe-science-denier-at.html

...and we trace that back to a cluster F of climate deniers on WUWT....

http://wattsupwiththat.com/

We never seem to see any actual climate scientists deniers, just people with puffed up titles in other fields calling themselves experts....and I say "What's up with that??"

Not entirely true. Superfreakonomics interviews a group of scientists. The group is called Intellectual Ventures. Chapter 5 is dedicated to GW. One of the scientists, Ken Caldeira, actually helped Al Gore with his film. before he saw the "light". In addition to his other duties he runs an ecology lab at Carnegie Institution, contributes to IPCC etc

The founder is Nathan Myhrvold. Bill Gates a former employer and investor, stated he "knows of no one smarter than Nathan".

In closing, who made the statement? "The measurement had been sheer luck, or perhaps a case of knowing the result they wanted to get-not an uncommon occurrence in science." The quote is from a book commenting on one of the "settled" science areas recently in the news.

A couple of other sites to look at, regardless of your "confirmed view" .. WattsUp", with a plethora of data from around the word, "IceCap", again with nothing but data…It is interesting to see the data that comes from those that get funding from Govt. sites, and heavily invested "Environmental" sites, that have huge irons in the fire for "Their industry", to rid our of the ugly and awful carbon energy sources, (Our Tax money, lobbied towards a Political bias), and the data from those that have to research and fund it themselves… Please think outside of the box--Al Gore does you no favors, although he has banked approx. $ 250 million through his Carbon Credit schemes….I wonder if my trees can get a reverse credit??????

Wow, I looked at both of those sites, but saw much more than just raw data.

Oh well, it's like I said at the beginning, there's plenty of data out there. We'll all just have to form our own opinions about it.

SE gave us the Whats Up With That site earlier.

Saying there is plenty of data out there is kinda raw. Suppose it is almost all crap? That could cleverly disguise one lot of good data. I think ice core analysis has a great deal to say about Earth's history, and where we are right now is on Earth. So let's get real, and go back to beginnings. There is no global freaking warming. Get it?

If anything the "giant black hole in the sun" spells our doom in the cold, frigid tundra to come, Ice Planet Earth 2.0

in the 1990s several computer models were developed to analyze climate.some of the notions extrapolated from that data live on to this day.perhaps they did a fair job at telling what had happened up to that point but they certainly were off target in their predictions of what was to come. the basic notion that temps would rise with carbon saturation levels made logical sense to many but the numbers have FAILED to match up with those predictions. plant life seems to be thriving off of carbon, temperature has stayed steady for thousands of years including the last 150 that mankind has been burning hydrocarbons. Mother Earth is doing just fine regulating our little incubator. carbon is up and so are yields on corn crops. should that make us panic??

" sea ice and polar bears"?

Sea ice isn't the issue, never has been.

Polar bears only increased when hunting them was curtailed.

Polar bear habitat is shrinking. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure our what that means to polar bear population.

Have some more tea.

GA Kevin LaPaire,

The data for everyone is the same. The difference is the lens or preconceived ideas one has and through which that data is interpreted. Everyone will interject a certain amount of bias into the process, that is human nature.

That also doesn't mean that all biases are of equal value. Some are based upon faulty thinking to start with and therefore they will be way off base.

The point a lot of people are missing on both sides of the debate is that we should be cleaning things up whether or not it is causing climate change. We are wasting huge amounts of resources just throwing things away or not recycling and you would have to be a fool to think that all of the pollution we are putting into the air and water is of no consequence to us.

We need to get busy cleaning everything up and stop arguing over the details. Whether or not is the wrong question to be asking here!

Agreed, but air pollution causes immediate health problems all over the world.

This ↓ is not a forest fire, it is smog. The result of burning coal.

It's hard to believe anybody will survive breathing that for very long....

Giant water cannons used to damp down the smog....

Talk about a ps hole in the snow....

Life is good. They have cars and cell phones now. And COPD.

They need nuclear energy badly, but not built on a fault line next to the ocean.

That picture is from China, not Japan. I am assuming you are referencing the Fukushima accident resulting from the Tsunami a few years ago.

It is not the result of burning coal. It is the result of burning a particular grade of coal, in a particular climate locality (humid), with virtually no environmental controls on the stack gases of NOX and SOX, much less particulate control.

Were you aware that most all coal has at least some Mercury content, and that Uranium content of North American coal runs on average around 1 part/million? That is 1 lb of uranium for every 500 tons. Yes, Mildred, one has to clean this stuff up, and we do it all the time.

It is not the U.S.A. you need be concerned with. We have a limited amount of energy produced by coal that is a mere fraction of world power generation. All of ours is under strict, strict regulations (that keep getting more strict). Other countries such as China do not fall under these same regulations, do not comply with them on a volunteer basis. Not only that, China uses a very, very large footprint of carbon combustion to produce silicon and magnesium. Go check it out.

Makes you feel sorry for the beautiful Chinese people that they are now subjecting themselves to the same death the English ran into amidst the 19th Century.

There are always consequences. I suspect that the truth is out there, but we are not mature enough as a race (human race) to accept that (1) we are not all powerful, and (2)many others have gone before us on the road to hell, having all started with the highest of intentions. Sure clean up what is around you, but do not go begging for trouble at the ends of the earth until you clean up your back yard first. We have done that. Now we must convince other nations it is really in the best interest of all concerned to start cleaning up their act.

Pollution, the over concentration of elements that can not be easily assimilated and neutralized by the environment , and therefor become toxic to it, is the greatest problem we have, IMHO. It is also a lot easier to convey that concept to anyone with an ability to observe. The troublesome elements are the ones that are not visible, i.e.. radiation, chemical bound etc. But put a little more CO2 into the air, and the plants love it…From what I have heard, the marijuana farmers add CO2 to absurd levels in order to stimulate growth.

I wish I could find the article that I am sourcing this idea from. The concept showed that with each "Scare", or "Climate threat", whether it be the return of the Little Ice Age (Newsweek, 1975), the overpopulation scares of Erlichsen et.al, or the current AGW scare , there had been a prior threat that had disappeared. The end of WW2 , that kept everyone occupied, led to the Korean war, which did much the same, on a smaller scale. After those threats passed, the next threat was Global Cooling, a retreat to the Ice Age, and over population. Then the Cold War arrived (Pun unavoidable), and we were occupied with that threat. Cold War done, next up is Global Warming. Of course, that theory was interrupted by the World Trade Center bombings, Iraq and all, but just put on the back burner. With Hussien and Osama gone, we are now back on track. Someone is always terrifying the masses, in order to extract a whole lot of emotion and money from them, and in doing so, exerting more and more control over them. In my mind, this concept does seem to have a lot of validity...

Maybe we need a good near miss, Comet threat, or a Martian landing to return things to proper perspective.

Lloyd, Murry Salby and few others are falling all over themselves in their frantic tip toeing around selected data and quasi-data on the anthropogenic climate issue.

Bui, really, folks, all of this becomes quite a bit of arguing over the arrangement of deck chairs in the context of the ticktocking of the atomic clock toward the midnite of nuclear winter. You ain't seen nothin' yet.

I'll put my money on Yellowstone blowing its top before nuclear winter.

I was just there. It would make a helluva mess out of a beautiful place.................................Earth that is!!!

What is this story I have been hearing about the trumpets of doom being heard in the Western Mountains? Has Sauren awakened? Where is that short little hobbit of an assistant I used to have? Has Gabriel blown it? The trumpet of doom?

I find it interesting they picked such a criticle thing for life to exist to call a threat to the earth! Just because plants need it to survive, Al Gore's Inconvenient truth was based on lies, the the vast amount of CO2 is produced from natural sources and the man made CO2 amount is minuscule in comparision doesn't mean they are wrong but it's all mans fault! We have not recorded temps and the dreaded green house gases let alone earths natural weather cycles nearly long enough to know for certain if global warming is actually a threat to the earth or not and those using such to create panic are doing us all a huge disservice while lining their bank accounts! If Al Gore believes the snake oil he's been selling why doesn't he downsize to reduce his own so called carbon foot print? You know, lead by example! Yes I know one individule making a change is not much but if many do then perhaps they can affect a change. Much like how the powers that be said people need to conserve energy, many have done their part to reduce their own needs, ad solar panels etc. And now power companies are starting to complain and I even read one article suggesting people point their panels to the West so they are only producing peak voltage during peak demand hours.. One thing for certain those deriving an income from a source will beat it to death before ever letting go! As stated before we will one day know the truth but with the snails pace the globe would seem to be warming by, if in fact it even is, it's doubtful anyone reading this thread will be around to find the answer!