Global Warming Truth

[silverfish]

I'm still waiting for you people to show one shred of science. Show your graph the proves there the global warming trend is gone?  Come on, please by all means.  Enough with the talk and claims. Anyone can post blog articles with ding dongs claiming just about anything, but that's proof, just a bunch of claims.

A dip in global temperature? LOL, that's your proof. That's your failed logic because if you consider a few years average then we can point ~ a dozen global warming and global cooling trends in the graph, lol. That's not science. You can't even seem to comprehend what a fluctuations are.

How about this:

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100022226/agw-i-refute-it-thus-central-england-temperatures-1659-to-2009/

[Azorus]

Silver give it up, no amount of evidence will change his mind.  All he will do is say that this graph proves his point more and call you an armature scientist, it's what he does.  And Paul as far as you saying that you will build free energy devices and sell them to people who don't want to build them that is not called free energy, it's hypocritical.  If people do buy your free energy device they would be stupid, but it wouldn't change the fact that you would be a hypocrite.

[PaulLowrance]

How about this:

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100022226/agw-i-refute-it-thus-central-england-temperatures-1659-to-2009/

Wrong! Wow, what an out right lie! If this wasn't so sad,
it would be hilarious. James Delingpole is *journalist* and
should not be practicing bad science because he's terrible
at it.  Furthermore, is someone paying Delingpole to be  deceptive.
Attached is an enlarged image of Central England temperature,
where you can clearly see the rise at the dawn of the
industrial age.

http://tamino.wordpress.com/2008/04/28/central-england-temperature/

Quote,

In this limited view, the temperature increase during
the modern global warming era is both quantitatively and
qualitatively unlike any other part of the record. Even
including all the earlier, less precise data, the recent
warming has brought central England to a climate much
warmer than previously measured.  The rate of warming
in CET since 1980 is 0.05 +/- 0.02 deg.C/yr, or half a degree C
per decade. If this trend continues,
then by mid-century CET will have increased by a substantial
amount, another 2 deg.C. This will bring CET to
heights unknown for at least 350 years, probably several
thousand years, and in all likelihood warmth not seen since
humans inhabited the British Isles.

Secondly, not that even matters since journalist Delingpole
out right lied, he's talking about "Global" warming, but his
entire claim is based on a Central England. Maybe someone
should tell the poor chap that Central England is not the world, lol.

OMG, all of these non-scientific people who are hitting the
forums like mad posting these lies gives me so much incentives
to investigate these people. I am so glad that the science
community is not giving in to these thugs, that over 97%
of all active publishing climatologist believe *humanity*
is the significant cause of global warming.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_change_consensus

And yes, the attached image does contain data up to the 2009.
It is a 30 year moving average, so each spot on the graph
spans 30 years. Basic physics.

[WilbyInebriated]

more shocking graphical data... it's actually pirates that are to blame.
from venganza.org

[ResinRat2]

I wrote this onis once, but it is worth repeating. Why are you even wasting your time with Lowrence. He is a hero in his own mind.

I repeat from previously:

Let's see, what will Paul say:

"I already dealt with this issue before, I'm not going to repeat myself."

"Those graphs are false because they are supported by big oil."

"The data is not reliable because it doesn't come from Wikipedia"

"You have shown yourself to be a (big oil supporter, idiot, liar, etc. whatever else I can dream up) Pirate, everyone else knows you are someone who takes things out of context."

"I looked over the numbers and they don't say what I want so they are false"

"Look, it wasn't even written by a climatologist"

"It wasn't written by the 97% of scientists that agree that man made global warming is a fact."

"I don't even want to talk to you guys anymore, but I keep talking because I would give 100% of my income to save the earth; but if you say I would do that then I will change what I quote from you and say what I wanted to say that I said."

"This thread is filled with big oil supporter idiots and everything they quote or write is false, NO MATTER WHAT!"

etc., etc., You are all wrong and liars and frauds. etc.

Did I miss anything? I'm sure new B.S. is coming. Just wait for it.

"Oh yeah, you must hate nature, while I love nature and the earth and Obama who I adore."

I forgot one: "That's bad science, no matter what they say because it disagrees with the 97% of scientists that agree with global warming.

That should cover most of it.