Global Warming

[AiA in Atlanta]

No, the Polar Vortex Does Not Disprove Global Warming.

[IQS.RLOW]

No, the Polar Vortex Does Not Disprove Global Warming.

Just like bushfires in Australia are not proof of CAGW nor are alarmist journo headlines and NGO commentator bullshit warranted?

It's what we realists have to suffer through everyday there is a hot day or a cyclone or a hurricane- unmitigated unrelenting bullshit foisted on an ignorant public by those with an agenda.

[AiA in Atlanta]

IQ is combating the vortex by blowing hot air.

[IQS.RLOW]

Add me to the list. You frybabies have blamed everything else on global warming

http://www.numberwatch.co.uk/warmlist.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Chard]

Let me help a lower down the rung, jutting browed, humanoid out here... (At least you've managed to keep yourself out of jail, which is quite a feat for your type in the US and sub continental Africa- although in Africa you would be able to devolve into your more natural state with less repercussion than the US...but kudos to you for rising above your base monkey like reactions like many of your brethren)

The bottom line is that, with no long-term trend identified in normalized hurricane dam- age over the twentieth century (in the United States or elsewhere; see ref. 8, for example), it is exceedingly unlikely that scientists will iden- tify large changes in historical storm behav- iour that have significant societal implications.

This is precisely what I am talking about with your inability to fucking comprehend written English. The key words here are "normalized hurricane damage", retard. What that means is after accounting for societal changes that mitigate storm damage (improved emergency response, better storm forecasting and tracking, improved building materials and construction techniques, etc), it explains why it is that storm damage hasn't increased as much as the increase in storm frequency and intensity.

Seriously, how much did your mother drink when she was pregnant with you? At this point fetal alcohol syndrome is the only thing I can think of to explain why you're this goddamn retarded.

[Rorschach]

Temperatures of -15C (with wind chill) in Winter is pretty normal here.

Where in Australia are -15C temperatures "pretty normal"?

Canberra is pretty cold at times actually, I note the wind chill comment.
Do you forget we have Snow in the Snowies...?
and that we have territory in Antarctica?

AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY

HIGHEST RECORDED TEMPERATURE:

* Canberra 42.2 C (108.0 F) on the 1st February, 1968


LOWEST RECORDED TEMPERATURE:

* Canberra -10.0 C (14.0 F) on the 11th July, 1971

Toss in wind chill and -15 would indeed be possible.

[Rorschach]

2013 Atlantic hurricane season wrap-up: least active in 30 years
By Brian McNoldy
November 25, 2013 at 10:24 am

The 2013 Atlantic hurricane season was the least active in thirty years. The season officially ends on Saturday, but in this lackluster year, it looks like we can wrap it up a little early.

On average (1981-2010), 12 tropical storms form during an entire season, 6-7 of those go on to become hurricanes, and 2 of those reach major hurricane intensity (category 3+). In 2013, there were 13 tropical storms, 2 hurricanes, and no major hurricanes. Even the two hurricanes that formed were just briefly minimal category 1 storms.

According to IPCC5 that compiles recent research and presents the state of the science, “studies that directly attribute tropical cyclone activity changes to anthropogenic greenhouse gas emission are lacking”. Gabriel Vecchi at GFDL summed up the connection very well in a recent interview with NPR: “given the data that we have available and the signal that we expect global warming to give us, which is still of uncertain magnitude and sign, we weren’t able to give it anything beyond low confidence. We didn’t have confidence to say whether we have seen trends yet.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/cap ... -30-years/

[Chard]

Because a single season invalidates the entire dataset, amirite.

[AiA in Atlanta]

IQ is combating the vortex by blowing hot air.

Must be working cause it is warming up here nicely.

[Rorschach]

The pre-industrial CO2 level was marginally lower than current levels and likely within the error factor. Neither they, nor the present IPCC claims of 400 ppm are high relative to the geologic record. The entire output of computer climate models begins with the assumption that pre-industrial levels were measurably lower. Elimination of this assumption further undermines the claim that the warming in the industrial era period was due to human addition of CO2 to the atmosphere. Combine this with their assumption that CO2 causes temperature increase, when all records show the opposite, it is not surprising IPCC predictions of temperature increase are consistently wrong.

The IPCC deception was premeditated under Maurice Strong’s guidance to prove CO2 was causing global warming as pretext for shutting down industrialized nations. They partially achieved their goal as alternate energies and green job economies attest. All this occurred as contradictory evidence mounts because Nature refused to play. CO2 increases as temperatures decline, which according to IPCC science cannot happen. Politicians must deal with facts and abandon all policies based on claims that CO2 is a problem, especially those already causing damage.

http://drtimball.com/2013/why-and-how-t ... formation/