"If you do not believe in climate change, you should not be allowed to hold public office"

Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
666888 said:
No meat eating dino's?


Your my own personal little troll Bucky, keep up the great work
Click to expand...
What did the meat eating dino's feed off of? It all gets back to plants, whether the dino ate them or another dino ate the plant eater.

And you are spamming this thread. Simply repeating yourself. It's pretty boring. One benefit to my continuing to reply to you is that while you struggle to come up with a thought and then -- god knows how -- you manage to post the ignorance, it gives your abused dog a rest.
 
SneekyNinja

SneekyNinja

Well-Known Member
Fogdog said:
What did the meat eating dino's feed off of? It all gets back to plants, whether the dino ate them or another dino ate the plant eater.

And you are spamming this thread. Simply repeating yourself. It's pretty boring. One benefit to my continuing to reply to you is that while you struggle to come up with a thought and then -- god knows how -- you manage to post the ignorance, it gives your abused dog a rest.
Click to expand...
You even heard about the dog too?

It must be true.
 
666888

666888

Well-Known Member
And if you bloated fat Americans would learn to live within your means, instead of borrowing 20trilloin dollars to maintain your lifestyles
The world would have a shit load less pollution and be in a much better place, and you wouldn't need endless war to supply all your goods
I can sense your guilt America , it would be why you are all so angry and disappointed with yourselves, fair enough too

So to save the world and the rest of humanity, you know what needs doing
Off you go America, don't come back
 
Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
666888 said:
Click to expand...
I can't read your mind. What's your point with this graphic?^^^ And explain it. Why are warming and cooling cycles from 400000 years ago applicable to today?

666888 said:
Of cause it was
Click to expand...
This one is hilarious. You show six data sets from satellites. Do you know where those observations were taken and what they mean?

I'll help you out. It is temperature anomoly of the mid-troposphere. Or about 5 miles up. Why do we even care about 5 miles up when thousands of surface temperature measurements tell us where we live is getting warmer? I wont spam you with the chart in my previous post which clearly shows without possible argument that the earth's surface is warming very rapidly as predicted by the amount of CO2 and other GHGs currently pumped into the atmosphere. But take a look because I'm not certain your memory retains anything for more than a few minutes.

Why bother to record atmospheric temperature 5 or miles out? It is good test of the model. It's not relevant to us, but it is a complex area of the atmosphere and helps those working to build an accurate model thresh out variables and help them improve on it.

Now, about the data he posted in this graph. Satellites are notoriously error prone when it comes to measuring temperature. To correctly measure temperature for comparison, the satellite must be in the same position each time. It must be moving at the same speed over time. This is not the case, satellites don't exactly trace the same orbit and they slow down over time. Also, satellites don't measure temperature directly, they measure microwave energy given off by oxygen and convert the data to temperature. Over the 30 years of satellite measurements, sensor tech changed so, each satellite produced different readings. In order to use the data properly, position, speed, error bias from each satellite has to be accounted for. Finally, the latitude makes a difference. The air above the tropics mixes more than than pole-ward latitudes. This also requires correction.

This is all to say that satellite data are horrible when trying to measure small changes. Look at the temperature scale. At the farthest right, there is an error between satellite data and model predictions of 0.6 C. That's tiny. What's missing in the plot you pasted here are error estimates -- both for satellite and model error. I dare say that the two probably overlap, which is why your "expert" left them out.

So there you have it. Measurements taken at a location irrelevant to us -- probably the least reliable data set available -- posted without error estimates and very strange smoothing algorithm for the line representing model data. All wrapped up to look convincing and cast doubt on valid and earnest research.

In other words, fake science. The plot was designed to fool you, not inform.
 
666888

666888

Well-Known Member
666888 said:
And if you bloated fat Americans would learn to live within your means, instead of borrowing 20trilloin dollars to maintain your lifestyles
The world would have a shit load less pollution and be in a much better place, and you wouldn't need endless war to supply all your goods
I can sense your guilt America , it would be why you are all so angry and disappointed with yourselves, fair enough too

So to save the world and the rest of humanity, you know what needs doing
Off you go America, don't come back
Click to expand...
Edit to add
You can all come back when you start making cool cars again and start having fun
 
Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
666888 said:
Click to expand...
There is a problem with that data at the extreme right of the plot. It ends at 2009 and predicts 2019 as colder with a straight line between them. Unlike your very strange plot, the trend since 2009 is upward, now downward.

Why are you so fixated on trying to fit man made climate change onto plots that show natural events? The two do not converge. At least not until human activity stops affecting the climate.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top