Topic: Reddit’s science forum banned climate deniers. - page 65. (Read 636446 times)

Likely because I showed you the actual data behind the claim of "no warming in 19 years," and you simply ignored it, going on to other sources that (you thought) supported your claim.

Like it or not, whether you call it a pause, slowdown or "no warming in 19 years," you look like a fool to try to cover up or ignore such things as actual temperature trends, when you stand on a soapbox and claim certain trends exist.

I know that true religious Warmers will find this test of faith a challenge, but what is, is.

Information post

Here is a quote of myself as Spendulus and his followers seem to just ignored it.
....

You are wasting your time replying to either retards or scammers. Just saying...

Organised campaigning to undermine public trust in climate science is associated with conservative economic policies and backed by industrial interests opposed to the regulation of CO2 emissions.[21] Climate change denial has been associated with the fossil fuels lobby, the Koch brothers, industry advocates and libertarian think tanks, often in the United States.[17][22][23][24] Between 2002 and 2010, nearly $120 million (£77 million) was anonymously donated via the Donors Trust and Donors Capital Fund to more than 100 organisations seeking to undermine the public perception of the science on climate change.[25] In 2013 the Center for Media and Democracy reported that the State Policy Network (SPN), an umbrella group of 64 U.S. think tanks, had been lobbying on behalf of major corporations and conservative donors to oppose climate change regulation.[26]

Spendulus and Wilikon gave this article out saying it proves the "pause they're all claiming". here is the article:

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2016/02/mann-splaining-the-pause.php

Of course ti's not a scientific article or study just a blog. But no problem the article says there is a pause so it's interesting. It's using a very biased vocabulary but hey, who has no opinion? It's not a crime to be happy when your side wins!

Let's check the sources then. Not very diversified sourcing but well. Mainly Nature articles so let's check them.

First source:
http://www.nature.com/news/global-warming-hiatus-debate-flares-up-again-1.19414?WT.ec_id=NEWS-20160225&spMailingID=50779167&spUserID=MTc2NjY4OTI4MwS2&spJobID=863136582&spReportId=ODYzMTM2NTgyS0

Do they talk about a pause in temperature?
"The debate revolves in part around statistics on temperature trends. The study1 that questioned the existence of the slowdown corrected known biases in the surface temperature record maintained by the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), such as differences in temperature readings from ships and buoys. This effectively increased the warming recorded, and the researchers also extended the record to include 2014, which set a new record high for average temperatures.

That work, led by Thomas Karl, director of NOAA’s National Centers for Environmental Information in Asheville, North Carolina, calculated the rate of global warming between 1950 and 1999 as being 0.113 °C per decade, similar to the 0.116 °C a decade calculated for 2000–14. This, Karl said, meant that an assessment done by the influential Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change in 20133  showing that warming had slowed was no longer valid.

Fyfe and his colleagues argue2 that Karl’s approach was biased by a period of relatively flat temperatures that extended from the 1950s into the early 1970s. Greenhouse-gas emissions were lower then, and emissions of industrial pollutants such as sulphate aerosols were cooling the planet by reflecting sunlight back into space. Fyfe says that his calculations show that the planet warmed at 0.170 °C per decade from 1972 to 2001, which is significantly higher than the warming of 0.113 °C per decade he calculates for 2000–14."

Ok so they never talk about a pause here... They talk about a slow down...

Let's check the second source:
http://www.nature.com/news/climate-change-hiatus-disappears-with-new-data-1.17700

"All told, Karl's team finds that global temperatures increased at a rate of 0.116°C a decade in 2000–14, compared to a rate of 0.113°C in 1950–99. And Karl says that rate will probably go up once his team calculates the temperature increase for the entirety of the rapidly warming Arctic. Researchers found in 2013 that gaps in Arctic observations artificially cooled the Met Office temperature record2.

The latest study only resolved part of the question. Climate models used by the IPCC still project warming to continue, but scientists have documented various factors for which the models have not accounted, resulting in suppressed temperatures. These contributors include weak solar irradiation, volcanic aerosols that block sunlight and ocean circulation3.

“Once you take into account the slight forcing errors, the actual occurrence of El Niños, et cetera, there is very little left to explain,” says Gavin Schmidt, director of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York City."

Damn no pause here either!


Could it be possible that they talk only about a slow down because it's all there is?

Denier.  Admit it, you denier.

“We do not believe any group of men adequate enough or wise enough to operate without scrutiny or without criticism. We know that the only way to avoid error is to detect it, that the only way to detect it is to be free to inquire. We know that in secrecy error undetected will flourish and subvert”. – J Robert Oppenheimer

Yale shuts down its climate change institute  

http://yaledailynews.com/blog/2016/03/01/climate-change-institute-shut-down/

Well, you see.  It's just a globe spinning on top of an N-dimensional spacetime fabric.  And of course N-dimensional spacetime is flat in N dimensions.  It's just not flat in 2d.  So you don't have to worry.

Ladies and gentlemen your attention please!

Seems like as usual Spendulus and Wilikon are using shameful methods to convince you. As usual they give out no scientific sources but rather biased blog posts, and as usual it seems that if you look a bit more precisely, the blog posts are wrong and misinterpret willingly their sources.

There is no "pause" in the last decades. There is a slow down in climate warming. Which IS interesting and lead the scientist to question their models!

I'm not saying there is no problem with current predictions or climate models! Of course there must be, climate is something too complicated to be perfectly predicted.

I'm saying climate change is real and every scientist agree with this. No data shows a "global cooling". No data shows a "pause".

Don't simply trust what Spendulus and Wilikon posts and take 5 minutes to go further. Then you'll see their claims are based on nothing but pitiful lies.

-------------------------------------------------------------
I always knew, deep down, he was a denier...

I deny we're living on a spinning globe! Global Warming isn't an issue when there's no globe.

...
Funny really how you were all applauding this reports 5 posts ago and when Valta took the time to look at the source you no longer approve it but don't explain why it's false xD

Seems like a whole lot of people are getting a whole lot of money and a few people are getting a whole lot of control out of the 'scary' nature of these models.  As long as the money and control keeps moving upwards, the 'scientists' can question to their heart's content.  But it would probably be a good career move if they kept largely quite on these questions, and in fact I don't see much mention made of the 'divergence' except on the 'denier' side of the fence.

So now they come clean — sort of.

Christy and his colleague Roy Spencer compile satellite-derived temperature readings at the University of Alabama, Huntsville. Their satellite data has shown no warming for about two decades, and has been cited by researchers skeptical of claims of catastrophic global warming.

“The bulk atmospheric temperature is where the signal is the largest,” Christy said in the hearing, referring to the greenhouse gas effect. “We have measurements for that — it doesn’t match up with the models.”

“Because this result challenges the current theory of greenhouse warming in relatively straightforward fashion, there have been several well-funded attacks on those of us who build and use such datasets and on the datasets themselves,” Christy said.

http://dailycaller.com/2016/02/26/scientists-finally-admit-climate-models-are-failing-to-predict-global-warming/

“There is this mismatch between what the climate models are producing and what the observations are showing,” John Fyfe, Canadian climate modeler and lead author of the new paper, told Nature. “We can’t ignore it.”

“Reality has deviated from our expectations – it is perfectly normal to try and understand this difference,” Ed Hawkins, co-author of the study and United Kingdom climate scientist, echoed in a blog post.

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2016/02/26/scientists-finally-admit-climate-models-are-failing-to-predict-global-warming/#ixzz41g2e7Ww8

So they are deniers too now?