Oh, and since we know for a fact that CO2 traps heat, you also need to explain why increased CO2 levels *aren't* causing any warming... because only the first 20 to 80 ppm or so are really noticeable, since CO2 absorption is logaritmic.
Oh boy. Okay, before the Industrial Revolution CO2 levels where around 260 - 280 ppm for millenia. Since then CO2 levels have risen to above 380. Looking at the graph, that's a roughly 2 Kelvin increase from CO2 alone, not counting positive feedback through water vapor. And that is noticeable. Oh BTW, CO2 levels are rising exponentially, so that compensates for your logarithm.
As for the "Hockey Stick": Climate myths: The 'hockey stick' graph has been proven wrong...
the key conclusion is the same: it's hotter now than it has been for at least 1000 years.
Of course, if you believe that the US National Academy of Science is in on the conspiracy, then this is what you'd expect them to say!
I believe in the data. Go look at your link and the version of Mann's graph that is up.
Well, let's look at the actual facts as opposed to the ones you want to see:
It shows fluctuating temperatures from 1000 through to 1900. From 1900 through to 2000 though the data suddenly takes a sharp rise, sharper than the entire rest of the graph. What stands out to me though isn't how warm it suddenly has become. What stands out is that the graph also shows that 100% of the reconstruction from 1000-1900 relies on various proxy data sources.
Well, no. What do you think "historical records" mean - music from the 1920s?
Actually, after 1900, what little proxy data is graphed lands FAR below the surface temperature record.
Where did you get idea from - don't tell, let me guess - the grey area? Excuse me, could you bother to read the text above the image? That would be the error bars. Now if you look at the second graph in the image, you will see reconstructions - and most of them are above the hockey stick line, and all of them follow the ups-and-downs. And if you look at the time before thermometers, Mann's reconstruction is actually among the warmer reconstructions, others would make the hockey stick stick out more.
What is more, without the surface temperature record there to draw the average up, from 1900-2000 the Mann graph would show nothing unprecedented at all about the last 100 years. It is in fact ONLY when surface temperature is included that the last 100 years looks in any way special.
Yeah, if it weren't for Global Warming there wouldn't be any Global Warming - imagine that.
The rain in Spain plainly stopped falling - well, less at least.
Scientists have recorded a decline in winter precipitation over the past 60 years in Spain, and they now forecast that precipitation will also decrease in spring and summer. A team from the Pyrenean Institute of Ecology (CSIC) has studied rainfall data from 1950 to 2006 and the climate projections for coming decades, showing that less rain will fall in future over the Iberian Peninsula. However, precipitation will continue to be more frequent in winter than in spring-summer.
what the hell are you talking about? The sun's output is variable. There's no averaging it when trying to model future climate change. And if the sun's output was higher in the '80s and '90s than it is in the 2000s, WHICH IT WAS, why does that article state that the sun's output hasn't increased since 1978?
Too bad there is no 11 year cycle in the temperature records.
It was settled by a tribe of Vikings called "the Rus" circa 850 A.D. who sailed far into the ICEFREE northern sea along Siberia, and traded silk with the Chinese.
>>>This warming thing never happened before humans got here.
Actually the Earth has spent apprxoaimtely 80% of its time in a Tropical Age (without global ice). The dinosaurs were alive during an ice-free age, and ditto our primitive mammalian ancestors. Having ice-covered poles is an unusual event, not the norm for our planet.
Okay, taking us back to the age of dinosaurs is a bit extreme even for conservatives.
Well, wattsupwiththat indeed - if you check the link to the updated data from your second link, you see that the ice floe your point stood on just melted.
The same goes for quite a few spots on the southern hemisphere. There is also the little tidbit that global warming stops desertification, and makes e.g. the sahara lose ground. The advantages of that can hardly be overstated.
Let's ignore the rest of your post, and just focus on this. I find it curious that some people will only believe climate predictions by computer models if they can find a positive aspect of Global Warming in them. But even if in the future a (small) part of the southern Sahara would turn green, large parts of Spain are turning to desert right now. And the Gobi desert doesn't seem to be shrinking yet either. And desertification doesn't even stop from the USA.
Could you fucking make up your mind whether Macs "use the same chipsets and components as standard PCs" or doesn't "use standard off-the-shelf components"?
The problem is that nobody actually analyzing the data but McIntyre has not found the "hockeystick", even when not using the method both Mann and McIntyre used (and which McIntyre claims he used right and Mann wrong).
Clancy read about an âoeiPod overheatingâ and âoecausing damage to home and harm to minor son,â in 2005; a 17-year-old girl awakening âoeto find her iPod Nano âsmoking and sparking,â in 2006; a man who âoe sustained a minor shock and some redness to his left handâ â¦âsparks and a reddish/orange glow, in 2006; an iPod, also in 2006, that âoecaught fire aboard a ship with over 2,000 persons onboardâ; an iPod Nano that began âoebillowingâ smoke out of a girlâ(TM)s bedroom in 2007 when her iPod âoecaught on fireâ and had âoesomehow fallen on the chair next to the desk,â causing the chair to âoesmolderâ; a man whoâ(TM)s Nano âoesuddenly burst into flames in his pocketâ; and a couple who were awakened by smoke alarms in 2008 when their sonâ(TM)s iPod was âoesmoking and meltedâ while their son slept, to name some.
So where are the serious injuries or property damage?
Let's pretend that Apple has absolutely no costs and the 30% they keep from sales on the App Store and the $99 for the SDK are pure profit. Then every developer making freeware apps that keeps people from buying $330 worth of games (111 of your Tetris clone 297) makes Apple lose money.
It kills the market for cheap games, with a C64 emulator they cant resell you copies of ancient games. Yes I know, being greedy is only slightly better then being a control freak.
Well, that's odd - the page doesn't list Cisco, when most Cisco equipment I laid my hands on in the last couple of years were made by them. And try to avoid using Cisco equipment when surfing the Internet.
Most people forget the we do not live in a pure democracy, but rather a democratic republic where the minority is protected from the excesses of the majority. A true democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what to eat for lunch.
Yeah, having a donkey and an elephant decide which sheep's for diner is so much better.
Slashdot Mirror
Oh, and since we know for a fact that CO2 traps heat, you also need to explain why increased CO2 levels *aren't* causing any warming ... because only the first 20 to 80 ppm or so are really noticeable, since CO2 absorption is logaritmic.
http://brneurosci.org/temperatures6.png
Oh boy. Okay, before the Industrial Revolution CO2 levels where around 260 - 280 ppm for millenia. Since then CO2 levels have risen to above 380. Looking at the graph, that's a roughly 2 Kelvin increase from CO2 alone, not counting positive feedback through water vapor. And that is noticeable. Oh BTW, CO2 levels are rising exponentially, so that compensates for your logarithm.
As for the "Hockey Stick": Climate myths: The 'hockey stick' graph has been proven wrong ...
the key conclusion is the same: it's hotter now than it has been for at least 1000 years.
Of course, if you believe that the US National Academy of Science is in on the conspiracy, then this is what you'd expect them to say!
I believe in the data. Go look at your link and the version of Mann's graph that is up.
Well, let's look at the actual facts as opposed to the ones you want to see:
It shows fluctuating temperatures from 1000 through to 1900. From 1900 through to 2000 though the data suddenly takes a sharp rise, sharper than the entire rest of the graph. What stands out to me though isn't how warm it suddenly has become. What stands out is that the graph also shows that 100% of the reconstruction from 1000-1900 relies on various proxy data sources.
Well, no. What do you think "historical records" mean - music from the 1920s?
Actually, after 1900, what little proxy data is graphed lands FAR below the surface temperature record.
Where did you get idea from - don't tell, let me guess - the grey area? Excuse me, could you bother to read the text above the image? That would be the error bars. Now if you look at the second graph in the image, you will see reconstructions - and most of them are above the hockey stick line, and all of them follow the ups-and-downs. And if you look at the time before thermometers, Mann's reconstruction is actually among the warmer reconstructions, others would make the hockey stick stick out more.
What is more, without the surface temperature record there to draw the average up, from 1900-2000 the Mann graph would show nothing unprecedented at all about the last 100 years. It is in fact ONLY when surface temperature is included that the last 100 years looks in any way special.
Yeah, if it weren't for Global Warming there wouldn't be any Global Warming - imagine that.
Scientists have recorded a decline in winter precipitation over the past 60 years in Spain, and they now forecast that precipitation will also decrease in spring and summer. A team from the Pyrenean Institute of Ecology (CSIC) has studied rainfall data from 1950 to 2006 and the climate projections for coming decades, showing that less rain will fall in future over the Iberian Peninsula. However, precipitation will continue to be more frequent in winter than in spring-summer.
what the hell are you talking about? The sun's output is variable. There's no averaging it when trying to model future climate change. And if the sun's output was higher in the '80s and '90s than it is in the 2000s, WHICH IT WAS, why does that article state that the sun's output hasn't increased since 1978?
Too bad there is no 11 year cycle in the temperature records.
Why do you think Russia is called Russia?
It was settled by a tribe of Vikings called "the Rus" circa 850 A.D. who sailed far into the ICEFREE northern sea along Siberia, and traded silk with the Chinese.
No they fucking didn't http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kievan_Rus'
>>>This warming thing never happened before humans got here.
Actually the Earth has spent apprxoaimtely 80% of its time in a Tropical Age (without global ice). The dinosaurs were alive during an ice-free age, and ditto our primitive mammalian ancestors. Having ice-covered poles is an unusual event, not the norm for our planet.
Okay, taking us back to the age of dinosaurs is a bit extreme even for conservatives.
You mean the government for 8 years that was paid into office by "Big Oil" money? Oh wait, that government actually suppressed science it didn't like.
Well, wattsupwiththat indeed - if you check the link to the updated data from your second link, you see that the ice floe your point stood on just melted.
The same goes for quite a few spots on the southern hemisphere. There is also the little tidbit that global warming stops desertification, and makes e.g. the sahara lose ground. The advantages of that can hardly be overstated.
Let's ignore the rest of your post, and just focus on this. I find it curious that some people will only believe climate predictions by computer models if they can find a positive aspect of Global Warming in them. But even if in the future a (small) part of the southern Sahara would turn green, large parts of Spain are turning to desert right now. And the Gobi desert doesn't seem to be shrinking yet either. And desertification doesn't even stop from the USA.
Not to be confused with a "Jules Verne" which = 20,000 leagues under that sea
As if one league of extraordinary Gents wasn't enough ...
Palm aren't violating Apple's copyright.
Nobody said they did, you stupid fucking hateboy. I hope your reading comprehension improves once you reach 5th grade.
Yeah, I guess the people who switched hardware to interrupts instead of using the good old active polling were also asleep at the switch.
Right - because that was a comparable step back in functionality (you fucking idiot).
I bet you said the same thing about active polling. Thanks for proving my point.
Could you fucking make up your mind whether Macs "use the same chipsets and components as standard PCs" or doesn't "use standard off-the-shelf components"?
Yeah, I guess the people who switched hardware to interrupts instead of using the good old active polling were also asleep at the switch.
Please. The poor people in Africa card?
What is killing people in Africa is tin pot Marxist dictators and Muslim extremists.
And you insist on taking away the food they grow themselves to those - are you working for Monsanto?
The problem is that nobody actually analyzing the data but McIntyre has not found the "hockeystick", even when not using the method both Mann and McIntyre used (and which McIntyre claims he used right and Mann wrong).
Clancy read about an âoeiPod overheatingâ and âoecausing damage to home and harm to minor son,â in 2005; a 17-year-old girl awakening âoeto find her iPod Nano âsmoking and sparking,â in 2006; a man who âoe sustained a minor shock and some redness to his left handâ â¦âsparks and a reddish/orange glow, in 2006; an iPod, also in 2006, that âoecaught fire aboard a ship with over 2,000 persons onboardâ; an iPod Nano that began âoebillowingâ smoke out of a girlâ(TM)s bedroom in 2007 when her iPod âoecaught on fireâ and had âoesomehow fallen on the chair next to the desk,â causing the chair to âoesmolderâ; a man whoâ(TM)s Nano âoesuddenly burst into flames in his pocketâ; and a couple who were awakened by smoke alarms in 2008 when their sonâ(TM)s iPod was âoesmoking and meltedâ while their son slept, to name some.
So where are the serious injuries or property damage?
Just because you don't like the answer.
So if Palm used GPLed software without providing the source to make more stuff interconnect, would you cheer?
Let me get this straight: you want to achieve universal device interoperability by having all mobiles use iTunes for syncing?
Let's pretend that Apple has absolutely no costs and the 30% they keep from sales on the App Store and the $99 for the SDK are pure profit. Then every developer making freeware apps that keeps people from buying $330 worth of games (111 of your Tetris clone 297) makes Apple lose money.
It kills the market for cheap games, with a C64 emulator they cant resell you copies of ancient games. Yes I know, being greedy is only slightly better then being a control freak.
So they allow free games because...
So what do you use for cabling? Not to mention Foxconn also manufactures for Nokia.
Well, that's odd - the page doesn't list Cisco, when most Cisco equipment I laid my hands on in the last couple of years were made by them. And try to avoid using Cisco equipment when surfing the Internet.
Most people forget the we do not live in a pure democracy, but rather a democratic republic where the minority is protected from the excesses of the majority. A true democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what to eat for lunch.
Yeah, having a donkey and an elephant decide which sheep's for diner is so much better.