United Nations' science advisers have boiled down their landmark climate report to one simple message -- prepare for a hotter world while slashing greenhouse gas emissions.
The IPCCs credibility has been so thoroughly trashed that no one takes them seriously except the MSM. The MSM has largely succeeded in keeping the truth about the discredited IPCC in silence. The MSM trumpeted/spun the BALI conference as a success while in reality it was the KYOTO process funeral.
Policy makers do not rely on the NY Times, GISS, NAS, or the IPCC as informations sources.
sasquatch2 wrote: The IPCCs credibility has been so thoroughly trashed that no one takes them seriously except the MSM.
...and who takes you seriously, Mr. "anomalies aren't on a temperature scale"?
Spin Spin.
My point was why would a graph with "anomolies" be presented as an indication of temperature trend with a misleading component---that is "anomolies" rather than temperatures? Answer.....to demonstrate a non-exitant trend to the unwary.
sasquatch2 wrote: The IPCCs credibility has been so thoroughly trashed that no one takes them seriously except the MSM.
...and who takes you seriously, Mr. "anomalies aren't on a temperature scale"?
Spin Spin. My point was why would a graph with "anomolies" be presented as an indication of temperature trend with a misleading component---that is "anomolies" rather than temperatures? Answer.....to demonstrate a non-exitant trend to the unwary.Tsk, tsk - still never bothered to actually determine what the term "anomly" actually means, did you? That might explain why you abandoned the other thread when I showed up, but continue to spout your ignorance here.
"Blue_Nose" said The IPCCs credibility has been so thoroughly trashed that no one takes them seriously except the MSM.
...and who takes you seriously, Mr. "anomalies aren't on a temperature scale"?
One thing which concerns me about that graph is, how it's (the graph) creators determined the "mean" value.
One would have to go so far back in time, in-fact, to a time when average temperature measurements could not have possibly been taken.
"ManifestDestiny" said I will be like Nostrodamus abnd predict there will be a major catastrophie in a major city some where in the world in the next decade.
OMG!!!!
We should give all our money to the UN because of this!!!!
"PluggyRug" said The IPCCs credibility has been so thoroughly trashed that no one takes them seriously except the MSM.
...and who takes you seriously, Mr. "anomalies aren't on a temperature scale"?
One thing which concerns me about that graph is, how it's (the graph) creators determined the "mean" value. One would have to go so far back in time, in-fact, to a time when average temperature measurements could not have possibly been taken.
Indeed.
If I do a graph starting with 1998 then I can show that the world is cooling and that 2007 was well below 'average'.
Prepare for a Ice Age is closer to the truth.
No money to be made by fraudsters in that scenario just yet. Wait a decade or so before we switch tacks.
Rubbish.
Prepare for a Ice Age is closer to the truth.
No money to be made by fraudsters in that scenario just yet. Wait a decade or so before we switch tacks.
Do you think it is a conspiracy ?
In a manner of speaking...more like GROUP THINK
The IPCCs credibility has been so thoroughly trashed that no one takes them seriously except the MSM. The MSM has largely succeeded in keeping the truth about the discredited IPCC in silence. The MSM trumpeted/spun the BALI conference as a success while in reality it was the KYOTO process funeral.
Policy makers do not rely on the NY Times, GISS, NAS, or the IPCC as informations sources.
http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewCommentary.a ... 0218a.html
The IPCCs credibility has been so thoroughly trashed that no one takes them seriously except the MSM.
The IPCCs credibility has been so thoroughly trashed that no one takes them seriously except the MSM.
...and who takes you seriously, Mr. "anomalies aren't on a temperature scale"?
Spin Spin.
My point was why would a graph with "anomolies" be presented as an indication of temperature trend with a misleading component---that is "anomolies" rather than temperatures? Answer.....to demonstrate a non-exitant trend to the unwary.
Blue_Nose
The IPCCs credibility has been so thoroughly trashed that no one takes them seriously except the MSM.
...and who takes you seriously, Mr. "anomalies aren't on a temperature scale"?
Spin Spin.
My point was why would a graph with "anomolies" be presented as an indication of temperature trend with a misleading component---that is "anomolies" rather than temperatures? Answer.....to demonstrate a non-exitant trend to the unwary.Tsk, tsk - still never bothered to actually determine what the term "anomly" actually means, did you? That might explain why you abandoned the other thread when I showed up, but continue to spout your ignorance here.
The IPCCs credibility has been so thoroughly trashed that no one takes them seriously except the MSM.
One thing which concerns me about that graph is, how it's (the graph) creators determined the "mean" value.
One would have to go so far back in time, in-fact, to a time when average temperature measurements could not have possibly been taken.
I will be like Nostrodamus abnd predict there will be a major catastrophie in a major city some where in the world in the next decade.
OMG!!!!
We should give all our money to the UN because of this!!!!
The IPCCs credibility has been so thoroughly trashed that no one takes them seriously except the MSM.
One thing which concerns me about that graph is, how it's (the graph) creators determined the "mean" value.
One would have to go so far back in time, in-fact, to a time when average temperature measurements could not have possibly been taken.
Indeed.
If I do a graph starting with 1998 then I can show that the world is cooling and that 2007 was well below 'average'.