when you type in "september sea ice extent 2012" into google.

Quote :

"No, there is no proof of this. It woulda be extremely obvious if this is what all scientists everywhere were doing."

Oh, so there's a magic thermometer somewhere that tells us exactly what the temperature is at any given time and is 100% always right? Scientists are declaring that temperatures are getting higher based on *shocker* the temperature record. What else would you call that?
And you're right, it IS plainly obvious, THAT'S WHAT I'M FUCKING SAYING!!!!

Quote :

"[Pre 1970s numbers adjusted down, post-1970s numbers adjusted up] is [a] factually inaccurate statement, causing you to believe wrong things."

Really?

1/4/2014 4:05:00 PM

i get the following when i do that:


is that what you were talking about?

[Edited on January 4, 2014 at 4:08 PM. Reason : .]

1/4/2014 4:07:40 PM

try a little harder, bro

1/4/2014 4:08:13 PM

how can i try harder to find what you are talking about? i have no idea what you were referencing, those are graphs when i google what you told me to google.

post a link to what you were citing.

1/4/2014 4:08:58 PM

you're getting closer. maybe you'll eventually find the articles if you stop looking on google image search


hell, let me help you out
http://www.lmgtfy.com/?q=september+2012+sea+ice+extent

[Edited on January 4, 2014 at 4:12 PM. Reason : ]

1/4/2014 4:10:45 PM

i can find that story, lots of posts about it, but where is the story you cited from 2 days later when the ice was back to normal?

1/4/2014 4:12:42 PM

keep looking.

1/4/2014 4:23:26 PM

i'm going to conclude that it doesn't exist, or the "return to normal" amount was still below average (as indicated on the graph i found googling what you told me to) unless you have a link to post

1/4/2014 4:24:44 PM

You're harping on the "return to normal," but ignoring the larger point: that it was caused by a fucking storm. You know, the very thing I was talking about. Stop being obtuse and arguing for the sake of being a dick.
People went apeshit about record sea ice losses, as evidenced by all of the media coverage of it (which you can see from your google search). A month and half later, NASA FINALLY admits that it was caused by a storm that started on August 1, right where *gasp* your pretty graph shows shit started decreasing rapidly. Did the media then publish corrections? Of course not, it didn't fit the narrative. Meanwhile, this time, when a group of fearmongerers get stuck in ice, the media and the AGW fearmongerers are quick to say, "oh, it was just a storm, nothing to see here". The difference is striking. And that's my point.

1/4/2014 4:29:36 PM

prove it

1/4/2014 4:30:05 PM

prove what? That there was a storm?
http://www.lmgtfy.com/?q=september+2012+sea+ice+extent+storm

Is NASA saying that it was due to a storm not good enough for you?

[Edited on January 4, 2014 at 4:32 PM. Reason : ]

1/4/2014 4:31:12 PM

Quote :

"Is NASA saying that it was due to a storm not good enough for you?"

no, because that's not what your narrative or point is. post a link that proves the narrative and chain of events you are citing (will probably take a couple links)

[Edited on January 4, 2014 at 4:35 PM. Reason : .]

1/4/2014 4:35:01 PM

so, you dispute that there were lots of reports about sea ice being at record lows in 2012.
You dispute that it was due to a storm.
You dispute that NASA reported that it was due to a storm.

1/4/2014 4:43:27 PM

i still haven't seen a link saying it was because of weather, but regardless you also need to show where it was reported to be because of climate change, where nasa said it was actually not because of climate change, and evidence that it was not reported that it was not because of climate change.

you haven't posted a single thing to support your position

1/4/2014 4:48:53 PM

1/4/2014 4:54:52 PM

Quote :

"THAT'S WHAT I'M FUCKING SAYING!!!!"

-aaronburro

1/4/2014 4:58:57 PM

1/4/2014 5:06:03 PM

I'm not sure how you expect people to engage in a dialogue when you make an assertion about an obscure story, demand that others go dig it up, call them a troll when you fail to make your point, and then you act surprised when people don't take your cherry-picking, agenda-biased blogger seriously.

1/4/2014 9:24:23 PM

How is taking the entire datasets for the southern hemisphere from two different reporting periods and looking at the difference "cherry-picking"? I don't think that word means what you think it means.

1/4/2014 9:27:37 PM

No, it's exactly what it means. The guy's blog is laced entirely with data that is hand-picked to match his embarrassingly obvious agenda.

1/4/2014 9:49:15 PM

Quote :

"Oh, so there's a magic thermometer somewhere that tells us exactly what the temperature is at any given time and is 100% always right? Scientists are declaring that temperatures are getting higher based on *shocker* the temperature record. What else would you call that? And you're right, it IS plainly obvious, THAT'S WHAT I'M FUCKING SAYING!!!!"

I feel like you have to be smarter than this, but you're exhibiting classic dunning Kruger.

There's not a magical thermometer, there is science. There are various methods, definitely some that neither you nor I know, to sanity check the data, and this is what's being done. It's not arbitrary.

1/5/2014 1:28:38 AM

caps, italics, and exclamation points, though.

1/5/2014 2:30:26 AM

so much for this "global warming" myth...


http://www.foxnews.com/weather/2014/01/04/polar-vortex-to-blast-frigid-air-over-much-us/?intcmp=latestnews

Quote :

"'Polar vortex' set to bring dangerous, record-breaking cold to much of US Published January 04, 2014FoxNews.com As much of the country digs out from a powerful winter storm that buried parts of the Northeast, tundra-like temperatures are poised to deliver a rare and potentially dangerous blow to the Midwest, with forecasters predicting a near-record or historic cold outbreak. The "polar vortex," as one meteorologist calls it, is expected to send cold air piled up at the North Pole down to the U.S., funneling it as far south as the Gulf Coast and driving temperatures below freezing for most of the nation. Forecasters expect a weekend warm-up in some areas before temperatures plunge again, sending wind chill temperatures in areas in North Dakota and Minnesota to minus 50 degrees by Saturday night. Those states are notorious for their cold winters, but states in the Mid-Atlantic and New England can also expect wind chill temperatures as low as minus 20 degrees. FOX NEWS WEATHER CENTER Cities and states are already taking precautions. Minnesota called off school for Monday statewide, the first such closing in 17 years, because of projected highs in the minus teens and lows as cold as 30 below. Milwaukee and Madison, Wis., students also won't be in class Monday. North Dakota Gov. Jack Dalrymple urged superintendents to keep children's safety in making the decision after the state forecast called for "life threatening wind chills" through Tuesday morning. Ken Simosko, a meteorologist from Bismarck, said it would take all of five minutes to get frostbite in minus 50 degree condition. "We usually don't call something 'life threatening,'" he told FoxNews.com. "But yes, we want people to know that this is very much a life-threatening event." Simosko urged people in the region to stay indoors when the temperature sinks. He said it is a rare event to see ground temperatures around the minus 25 degree mark combined wind gusts up to 30 miles an hour. Besides the cold air, meteorologists are also eyeing another snowstorm that might form over the Midwest this weekend and potentially dump 6 to 12 inches of snow. The storm is expected to turn to rain as it makes its way east. At least 16 deaths were blamed on the storm as it swept across the nation's eastern half on Friday, including three people who officials said died at least partly because of the extreme cold. Meanwhile, some cities saw record lows on Friday. In Wisconsin, a record low temperature was set in Green Bay, where the mercury dipped to minus 18. The National Weather Service said that topped the 17-below-zero mark last recorded in 1979. Sunday's playoff game in Green Bay could be among one of the coldest NFL games ever played. Temperatures at Lambeau Field are expected to be a frigid minus 2 degrees when the Packers and San Francisco 49ers kick off, and by the fourth quarter it'll be a bone-chilling minus 7, with wind chills approaching minus 30, according to the National Weather Service. Officials are warning fans to take extra safety measures to stay warm including dressing in layers and sipping warm drinks. Warming centers opened around the region, homeless shelters saw larger crowds and cities took special measures to look after those most vulnerable to the cold. Outreach teams were searching New York City streets for homeless people at risk of freezing to death. And though this cold spell will last just a few days as warmer air comes behind, it likely will freeze over the Great Lakes and other bodies of water, meaning frigid temperatures will likely last the rest of winter, said Ryan Maue, a meteorologist for Weather Bell. "It raises the chances for future cold," he said, adding it could include next month's Super Bowl in New York. Fox News' Edmund DeMarche and the Associated Press contributed to this report."

1/5/2014 8:42:35 AM

Cold weather and global warming aren't mutually exclusive.

Also, http://www.theguardian.com/weather/2014/jan/02/heatwave-temperatures-climb-towards-50c

[Edited on January 5, 2014 at 1:52 PM. Reason : ]

1/5/2014 1:49:51 PM

I would have replied with:

There's a polar vortex bringing record cold temps, so don't forget your parka today in central Australia!

but y0willy0 is just trolling

1/5/2014 2:15:05 PM

You like to keep proving you're the dumbest cunt on this website don't you?

You're literally the only person who doesn't know for a fact that it's Smath74.

Keep up the good work.

[Edited on January 5, 2014 at 7:39 PM. Reason : -]

1/5/2014 7:39:16 PM

^^lol yeah i can attest that A is not him. but don't ask how i know

1/5/2014 9:24:43 PM

He is subtly handicapped. Like big4country.

Mild autism I think.

1/5/2014 9:45:18 PM

[Edited on January 6, 2014 at 10:28 AM. Reason : big plz]

1/6/2014 10:27:17 AM

facebook friend status:

Quote :

"People are done believing in global warming..... right?"

Quote :

"I never believed it in the first place and this is me complaining how cold it is now..."

sigh

1/6/2014 11:04:07 AM

From Chit-Chat:

Quote :

"scientists in the 1970's were saying there is global cooling. make up your damn mind i also like how the solutions to global warming problem just coincidentally are the same goals the communists have to destroy the economy"

1/6/2014 12:04:47 PM

^Well the thing is a lot of their goals are similar (eco-nuts and communists).

Whenever there's a heatwave and an AGW believer cites it as proof of global warming I look like this:

I make the same damn face when a skeptic says the same thing in the winter. Hypocrites...we are surrounded by them

(I realize the above story is posted by a troll).

1/6/2014 2:15:35 PM

you know, the goal of destroying the world and the economy

1/6/2014 4:14:13 PM

Drats, you've figured us out! As the resident tree-hugger, I must confess our objects. See, if we save a tree, then that tree can't be used to print money. If money can't be printed, then the economy will be ruined! Mwahahaha!

1/6/2014 5:52:11 PM

^but think of all those carbon credits that dollar could buy.

1/6/2014 8:17:22 PM

I'm a bit preoccupied thinking about all of the Republicans that were for carbon credits before they were against them.

1/6/2014 9:02:05 PM

Just two things I threw together during my break....

1/6/2014 9:23:44 PM

Ironic how Americans believe this crap about "communism" when the same things that save our environment, healthcare and social structure, will also save our economy long term.

1/6/2014 10:19:45 PM

1/7/2014 3:14:19 PM

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/01/10/san-francisco-environmentalists-want-global-warming-warning-on-gas-pumps/?intcmp=latestnews

1/10/2014 11:02:35 AM

^jesus it's just a theory. it hasn't even been prooved.

1/10/2014 11:14:12 AM

Their statement is problematic because of the wording. Not about global warming, but about the impact. It says:

Quote :

"The state of California has determined that global warming caused by greenhouse gases poses a serious threat to the economic well-being, public health, natural resources and the environment of California."

At best, this is very disingenuous. There is some threat to the environment of California, but it's not much. That's always the debate with warning labels. It's like cautioning people about the risk of cancer of nuclear power while coal causes mortality in droves. That's lying by omission. This is too.

I recently saw an illustration on this point - the impact of climate change on different places.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/10/30/climate-change-vulnerability-index-countries-impacts-costs_n_4174938.html



California is fine.

Now we still have a different problem in the public debate, where Smath74 denies global warming itself. It's wrong. Just say "global warming won't hurt us". That's just plain truth. But you're a bad person for denying valid science because it's easier than admitting what you really believe. And you should feel bad.

1/10/2014 11:48:06 AM

if you couldn't see that my previous post was facetious i feel bad for you son.

1/10/2014 12:23:28 PM

he's got 99 problems but not believing in climate change ain't one

1/10/2014 2:29:18 PM

Regardless of whether global warming is real or not, I think its laughable when people in the US talk about US policies that might reign in global warming if it is there.

Until we gain sovereignty over China and India, there's not shit we can do about slowing it down, because obviously they don't give a shit about it.

1/10/2014 2:31:50 PM

we are responsible for 18%-20% of the world greenhouse gas emissions directly, and drive emissions in other countries by our consumerism, so how we react can make a difference

1/10/2014 2:35:01 PM

Lucky for us India is fucking itself, then.

Also lol Africa? Maybe this will give them something to occupy themselves with besides AIDS, rape, and civil war.

[Edited on January 10, 2014 at 2:38 PM. Reason : -]

1/10/2014 2:37:19 PM

^Right now maybe, but as China and India continue to become more reliant upon combustible engines for their transportation, that number might go down over time.

1/10/2014 2:37:57 PM

its still a significant percent, and our consumerism still drives some of the emissions in other countries.

so your idea that it doesn't matter what we do is laughable

1/10/2014 3:33:25 PM

So what is your solution? Stop consumering?

1/10/2014 3:34:31 PM