THE ACCURATE RELOADING POLITICAL CRATER

Page 1 2 3 4 

Moderators: Walterhog
Go
New
Find
Notify
Tools
Reply
  
Climate Change Denialism Just Got a Lot Harder Login/Join 
one of us
posted
Google, those evil bastards, just made it a LOT harder to bleat about "weather" and "solar flares" and such bullshit with a new feature on Google Earth called "Timelapse" that makes 40 years worth of satellite images of any spot you choose available with a couple of clicks so you can see directly the drying of wetlands and the receding glaciers.

https://www.cnn.com/2021/04/15...timelapse/index.html

Feel free to take it for a spin...

https://earth.google.com/web/d...0NDM4YmI2ODk0NDUyOTc
 
Posts: 5847 | Location: Tennessee | Registered: 09 December 2007Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
Yes, there is climate change. No denying it. Been going on for the last 4 billion years or so. We've been in a warming trend since the end of the last glaciation period about 15,000 years ago when there was a mile high glacier above NYC. There are cities below the Mediterranean Sea that are 100 ft under water and have been for hundreds of years. Do yourself a favor and enroll in a geology class and learn what real climate change is all about and what causes it. Then you can stop making a fool of yourself on forums.
 
Posts: 2830 | Location: SC,USA | Registered: 07 March 2002Reply With Quote
new member
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Bobster:
Yes, there is climate change. No denying it. Been going on for the last 4 billion years or so. We've been in a warming trend since the end of the last glaciation period about 15,000 years ago when there was a mile high glacier above NYC. There are cities below the Mediterranean Sea that are 100 ft under water and have been for hundreds of years. Do yourself a favor and enroll in a geology class and learn what real climate change is all about and what causes it. Then you can stop making a fool of yourself on forums.


Fool? Only fools are the ones who are making the rich even wealthier for believing in this nonsense. Geology class? At a college? sorry most colleges do not educate, they indoctrinate.
 
Posts: 6 | Location: USA | Registered: 15 April 2021Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
Nothing gets harder when you are willing to believe that the earth is flat.

Dumbasses.


-Our long national nightmare is over.

 
Posts: 10929 | Registered: 20 September 2012Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
Well, the drying of wetlands around here has a lot more to do with tiling and a lot less to do with “climate change”

We had a number of lakes in the region go down due to aggressive irrigation in the southwest- the rainfall difference didn’t account for it.


So is that climate change? Probably.

Has nothing to do with greenhouse gasses though.

How about a global ban on watering grass/golf courses?
 
Posts: 6900 | Location: Minnesota USA | Registered: 15 June 2007Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Bobster:
Yes, there is climate change. No denying it. Been going on for the last 4 billion years or so. We've been in a warming trend since the end of the last glaciation period about 15,000 years ago when there was a mile high glacier above NYC. There are cities below the Mediterranean Sea that are 100 ft under water and have been for hundreds of years. Do yourself a favor and enroll in a geology class and learn what real climate change is all about and what causes it. Then you can stop making a fool of yourself on forums.


When you're enrolled in the geology class, pay some extra attention to the time scales they're talking about, 15.000 years is nothing. The current rate of change in climate previously have always coincided with mass extinction events.
 
Posts: 378 | Registered: 08 October 2011Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
Whoa now. Let's not go too far.....


quote:
Originally posted by crbutler:
Well, the drying of wetlands around here has a lot more to do with tiling and a lot less to do with “climate change”

We had a number of lakes in the region go down due to aggressive irrigation in the southwest- the rainfall difference didn’t account for it.


So is that climate change? Probably.

Has nothing to do with greenhouse gasses though.

How about a global ban on watering grass/golf courses?


-Our long national nightmare is over.

 
Posts: 10929 | Registered: 20 September 2012Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
quote:
Climate Change Denialism just got a lot harder



Deniers are gonna be deniers, no matter what, even evidence.

quote:
Originally posted by Bobster:
Yes, there is climate change. No denying it. Been going on for the last 4 billion years or so. We've been in a warming trend since the end of the last glaciation period about 15,000 years ago when there was a mile high glacier above NYC. There are cities below the Mediterranean Sea that are 100 ft under water and have been for hundreds of years. Do yourself a favor and enroll in a geology class and learn what real climate change is all about and what causes it. Then you can stop making a fool of yourself on forums.


How do you know that? Were you there? Or did you rely on science to inform you? Could it be that it's the same science that's informing you of the current situation, yet you choose to deny?


--------------------------------------------------------

Reality: Resistance is Futile.

---------------------------------------------------------

 
Posts: 13176 | Location: Depends on the Season | Registered: 17 February 2017Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
Climatology is a relatively new science that emerged in the late 19th century. It is based on theories and postulations. It's practitioners rely on computer modeling created in their own minds with unreliable data to predict a pre-determined supposition. Namely that humans caused it and it needs to be regulated. This in total denial that much greater changes in climate occurred long before humans became industrialized. Animal farts I guess.

Geology on the other hand is an empirical and observational science. Ex. If there is a 200 foot thick layer of limestone depositions in front of me there must have been a warm shallow sea here because we know from observation that this is how limestone layers form.

Or if this granite boulder in front of me, in a U-shaped valley, is polished smooth with deep grooves in it, then it was caused by a glacier of a certain mass as observed in other areas of known glaciation where this has been observed before. With the known density of ice I can calculate how high the glacier was.

The sea level at my families beach house on the Atlantic Ocean has not changed in the last 50 years despite claims that it would rise. This all based on climate change predictions. My observation is that sea level did not rise based on empirical measurement by state authorities. Am I right or was the climate scientist right?

I am scuba diving in the Mediterranean and discover buildings and statues in 150 feet of water. They are dated to 3,000 years ago. Well what the hell caused that? Humans burning sticks and cow dung I guess.

Educate yourself.

quote:
Originally posted by Magine Enigam:
quote:
Climate Change Denialism just got a lot harder



Deniers are gonna be deniers, no matter what, even evidence.

quote:
Originally posted by Bobster:
Yes, there is climate change. No denying it. Been going on for the last 4 billion years or so. We've been in a warming trend since the end of the last glaciation period about 15,000 years ago when there was a mile high glacier above NYC. There are cities below the Mediterranean Sea that are 100 ft under water and have been for hundreds of years. Do yourself a favor and enroll in a geology class and learn what real climate change is all about and what causes it. Then you can stop making a fool of yourself on forums.


How do you know that? Were you there? Or did you rely on science to inform you? Could it be that it's the same science that's informing you of the current situation, yet you choose to deny?
 
Posts: 2830 | Location: SC,USA | Registered: 07 March 2002Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
quote:
ot Harder



Wrong, it will make it easier. But first,When glaciers here in the north the water they contained in the

ice age was mile deep and oceans were 200 ft lower , nothing to do with CO2..

The time lapse will show that parts of the earth are cooled and that balances out the parts made

warmer due to climate shifts of the Atlantic and Pacific oceans. And if the poorly sited

weather stations are fixed, their is no warming, but there is slight cooling..

Co2 is not a factor...


MZEE WA SIKU
 
Posts: 27473 | Registered: 03 February 2003Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Grandpasez:
quote:
ot Harder



Wrong, it will make it easier. But first,When glaciers here in the north the water they contained in the

ice age was mile deep and oceans were 200 ft lower , nothing to do with CO2..

The time lapse will show that parts of the earth are cooled and that balances out the parts made

warmer due to climate shifts of the Atlantic and Pacific oceans. And if the poorly sited

weather stations are fixed, their is no warming, but there is slight cooling..

Co2 is not a factor...


Go find where it's cooling, where glaciers are advancing instead of retreating or disappearing.
 
Posts: 5847 | Location: Tennessee | Registered: 09 December 2007Reply With Quote
one of us
Picture of JBrown
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Jefffive:

Go find where it's cooling, where glaciers are advancing instead of retreating or disappearing.


https://www.google.com/amp/s/a...reenland-ice-growing


I’m up here in Barrow and very few people doubt climate change up here. But the National Geographic article I provided the link to shows the type of nutty double speak that only emboldens the doubters. “The glacier is advancing, but only at the edges. It is thickening too, but that is possibly not good. It’s the biggest glacier in Greenland, but it’s not a significant glacier....”

What kind of BS is that?
Climate change is political, and both sides have their heads in the sand.

Remember, it was called “Global Warming” until we had multiple years of overall cooler numbers worldwide, then it was magically renamed “climate change”.

The named changed, but the money is still going to the same places...


Jason

"You're not hard-core, unless you live hard-core."
_______________________

Hunting in Africa is an adventure. The number of variables involved preclude the possibility of a perfect hunt. Some problems will arise. How you decide to handle them will determine how much you enjoy your hunt.

Just tell yourself, "it's all part of the adventure." Remember, if Robert Ruark had gotten upset every time problems with Harry
Selby's flat bed truck delayed the safari, Horn of the Hunter would have read like an indictment of Selby. But Ruark rolled with the punches, poured some gin, and enjoyed the adventure.

-Jason Brown
 
Posts: 5820 | Location: Nome, Alaska(formerly SW Wyoming) | Registered: 22 December 2003Reply With Quote
Administrator
posted Hide Post
They can claim whatever they wish.

The world has gone through endless warm cold periods.

And anyone who thinks can change it is an idiot!

Money.

Money.

Stupidity!


www.accuratereloading.com
Instagram : ganyana2000
 
Posts: 57454 | Location: Dubai, UAE | Registered: 08 January 1998Reply With Quote
Administrator
posted Hide Post
See what I mean!

My pets are part of my family.

Environmentalists can stick a n elephants dick up their rear ends and can elephants trunk down their throats rotflmo


www.accuratereloading.com
Instagram : ganyana2000
 
Posts: 57454 | Location: Dubai, UAE | Registered: 08 January 1998Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
I'm ready for global warming to come back. A week straight of bitter wind and snow. Sure doesn't feel like spring.
 
Posts: 4511 | Registered: 10 April 2009Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
quote:
where glaciers


It aiun't the glaciers , it is the increasing depth of snow and ice

on Antarctica, cause it is getting colder there, which counterbalances the

slight warming in the north, which is due to the climate shifts of the oceans.

Antarctica is as big as the US and that along with the area around it cooling

means when averaged out with the rest of the world there is no warming.


MZEE WA SIKU
 
Posts: 27473 | Registered: 03 February 2003Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
The earth warmed up after the ice age and reached a peak 8000 years ago

and has been in a cooling trend ever since......It is the trend that counts

and it all these thousands of years matches the suns activity..



MZEE WA SIKU
 
Posts: 27473 | Registered: 03 February 2003Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
According to those long-term cycles we should still be heading towards a new ice-age, the earth should be cooling, but it isn't, human activity has broken that trend, and very abruptly (on geological timescale), which is very visible in your image, 2004 is way above where it should be.
And here is a more recent one, with 2016 in it.

 
Posts: 378 | Registered: 08 October 2011Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Bobster:
Climatology is a relatively new science that emerged in the late 19th century. It is based on theories and postulations. It's practitioners rely on computer modeling created in their own minds with unreliable data to predict a pre-determined supposition. Namely that humans caused it and it needs to be regulated. This in total denial that much greater changes in climate occurred long before humans became industrialized. Animal farts I guess.

Geology on the other hand is an empirical and observational science. Ex. If there is a 200 foot thick layer of limestone depositions in front of me there must have been a warm shallow sea here because we know from observation that this is how limestone layers form.

Or if this granite boulder in front of me, in a U-shaped valley, is polished smooth with deep grooves in it, then it was caused by a glacier of a certain mass as observed in other areas of known glaciation where this has been observed before. With the known density of ice I can calculate how high the glacier was.

The sea level at my families beach house on the Atlantic Ocean has not changed in the last 50 years despite claims that it would rise. This all based on climate change predictions. My observation is that sea level did not rise based on empirical measurement by state authorities. Am I right or was the climate scientist right?

I am scuba diving in the Mediterranean and discover buildings and statues in 150 feet of water. They are dated to 3,000 years ago. Well what the hell caused that? Humans burning sticks and cow dung I guess.

Educate yourself.



You educate yourself!!!

"Climatology is a relatively new science that emerged in the late 19th century. It is based on theories and postulations."

It's not ALL based on theories and postulations. Some of the key and fundamentals are not disputed anymore, except by science deniers, such as the CO2 effect. And is not ALL science based on theories and postulations at some point in the discovery and affirmation process in the scientific methods?


I own property in Alaska and upon it sits two glacier polished rocks. There are others in the neighborhood. One of the rocks is so large the best that could be done was to push it around with a bulldozer. So now it's the corner stone to my driveway. I knew that the rocks are glacier rocks because of the science I learned in school long ago.

https://www.thenation.com/arti...itary-navy-flooding/

The US Navy Has a Water Problem
The Second Fleet was reactivated to patrol the Arctic. Only problem is, the fleet’s home is on the front lines of sea-level rise: Naval Station Norfolk.

So, those structures you know of underwater - there are lots of examples from ancient times. Scientists are not ignorant people. They know about that,(even though they weren't there Wink) So, imagine that whatever climate change cause that, which may still be ongoing, and the acceleration from man-made causes in addition. Or as pointed out in the preceding post, a cooling trend reversed by man made causes.

After all, glaciers don't lie, and they are not in denial.


--------------------------------------------------------

Reality: Resistance is Futile.

---------------------------------------------------------

 
Posts: 13176 | Location: Depends on the Season | Registered: 17 February 2017Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
quote:
2004 is way above where it should be.



Exactly and do you know why........

The why is poorly sited weather stations/thermometers, being affected by the urban heating

of the cities and airports getting built up around/next to them , giving readings that are applied to much larger cooler

geographic areas, and added into the averages, to repreaent those large areas,......

About a quarter of the stations are poorly sited, that way...

Warming is being claimed due to raises in the average of fractions of degrees and a quarter of the stations

input that on average read 3-4 deg too high , it is easy to see what has happened.

On the chart they claim warming with less than 1/2 degree of rise but all that rise

is from some of the thermometers just measuring sun heated blacktop and concrete....It is phony..


MZEE WA SIKU
 
Posts: 27473 | Registered: 03 February 2003Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
quote:
glaciers don't lie,


Right and they in the north are telling us that we have warmer climate shift to the north,

ocean climate shift, nothing to do with CO2, or any world wide warming...

But ice sheets in Anarctica are being pushed out faster , some breaking off,

due to much more snow and ice piling up behind them over last 50-70 years

due to being colder there, making it snow more.Nothing to do with CO2...


MZEE WA SIKU
 
Posts: 27473 | Registered: 03 February 2003Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
quote:
"Climatology is a relatively new Cult that emerged in the late 19th century. It is based on theories and postulations."



There! Now the statement is correct!


.
 
Posts: 39194 | Location: Crosby and Barksdale, Texas | Registered: 18 September 2006Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
Trying to clear up a few factual matters.

1. It's not cold weather that makes for glaciers--it's snowfall. Where glaciers are advancing, there's been an increase in snowfall.

Snowfall is caused when warm moist air meets a cold front. Sometimes, depending on conditions, an increase in temperature can result in more moist air in winter. Winters may be growing warmer and shorter, but if there has been more snowfall in winter, the glaciers will advance.

This is what's been going on in Antarctica. Increasing snowfall is causing the glaciers (ice sheets) to advance.

So pointing to a few glaciers that are advancing as evidence there is no global warming is bunk.

2. Ancient cities in the Mediterranean are under water as a result of earthquakes, not rising sea levels.
 
Posts: 4070 | Location: Anchorage, Alaska | Registered: 08 March 2013Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
[quote]not cold weather[/quote\

IN ANARCTICA IT WAS AND IS.

tHE GLOBAL COOLING deal that got started in the 60-70s was due partly to reports

from Antarctic interior US run, weather stations reporting huge drops in temps, like 16 deg and more in

a ten year period.... Then when the powers to be decided they could get rich with warming, they forgot about the

drop in Antarctica , buried that data and now only have 4 stations on the coasts there , that they count,

for an area the size of US or Canada. And also reported and sat views show the ice/snow, is building up thicker..

Now you are right about warmer air meeting colder air makes it snow. Butwe have the oceans warming shift to the

north away from Antarctica leaving the onshore winds with the moisture a little cooler, so the interior temps

had to cool , which records now hidden say they did, to get the differential to make heavy snow....

AGW is a scam, and events described have not shown warming, and CO2 has no connection ......


MZEE WA SIKU
 
Posts: 27473 | Registered: 03 February 2003Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
quote:
few glaciers t


Antarctica has more than a few ...It is as big as Can.


MZEE WA SIKU
 
Posts: 27473 | Registered: 03 February 2003Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
quote:
result of earthquakes


Are you trying to say the ice age never happened..

It happened and covered over 12 mil sq miles, a mile deep in some places .

That water came from the oceans , lowering the levels couple hundred ft.

Ancients built cities to the then waters edge, then when the ice melted

the cities ended up under water. That accounts for the FLOOD narratives

in many ancient societies and civilizations..,,,.........


MZEE WA SIKU
 
Posts: 27473 | Registered: 03 February 2003Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
The Mediterranean was never covered in glaciers, at least not during the most recent glacial period that ended 10-15,000 years ago. The ancient cities are only 2-3,000 years old.

In the last three thousand years, sea levels haven't risen anything close to 150 feet. Most of the glacier retreat and and resulting sea rise (not counting during the Industrial Age) had already occurred when those cities were built.

No, you're wrong here, Grandpa. It was earthquakes that put those cities underwater. Look it up.
 
Posts: 4070 | Location: Anchorage, Alaska | Registered: 08 March 2013Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Saeed:
See what I mean!

My pets are part of my family.

Environmentalists can stick a n elephants dick up their rear ends and can elephants trunk down their throats rotflmo


I watched about 5 seconds of that idiot. Hard to imagine someone could take him serious.

And yes, my two dogs are part of my family!
 
Posts: 2078 | Location: Utah | Registered: 23 February 2011Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
quote:
Mediterranean was never covered in glaciers,


I did not say it was. The glaciers stopped north of there.

And there are many underwater ruins all around the world on what is

called continental shelves, now under water, They all couldn't have been caused

to be underwater by earthquakes............The ice age lowered the ocean levels

and when it melted the cities ended up under water...

Have you heard of piri reis ,,,,,


MZEE WA SIKU
 
Posts: 27473 | Registered: 03 February 2003Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
The massive sheets of ice locked away water, lowering the sea level, exposing continental shelves,

joining land masses together, and creating ''''extensive coastal plains'''.

During the last glacial maximum, 21,000 years ago, the sea level was about

125 meters (about 410 feet) lower than it is today.


MZEE WA SIKU
 
Posts: 27473 | Registered: 03 February 2003Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
That may be true, Grandpasez, but the ruins are not 21,000 years old. Not even close.

I don't know what other ruins you're talking about, but I bet most of them went under when the land dropped due to tectonic events, i.e., earthquakes.
 
Posts: 4070 | Location: Anchorage, Alaska | Registered: 08 March 2013Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
Some tested in Mediteranean , were younger, mainly towns.

But their are many around the Azores , probably where the Atlantis

chronicles come from ,. Water level 400 ft lower and the Azores would

be a small continent.. Ruins underwater in Black sea.. and others worldwide.

Now how could 4000 yr old towns off of Sicily and in Black Sea be under by flooding, not by earthquakes..

Well when ice age dropped ocean levels the Mediteranean and Black, would not be connected to Atlantic.

Maybe never connected much before. With north Africa green at the time, it had big rivers feeding it and other rivers

from the north it was just a smaller inland sea. Or two small inland seas/

When Atlantic rose after ice melted, after a while it broke through and flooded.


Have you heard of Piri Reis...


MZEE WA SIKU
 
Posts: 27473 | Registered: 03 February 2003Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CM_QS984JKI&t=540s

How Geography Turned the Sahara Green ...............


MZEE WA SIKU
 
Posts: 27473 | Registered: 03 February 2003Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
Mysterious 10,000 Year-Old Underwater Ruins in Japan ...www.ancient-origins.net › ancient-places-oceania › mys...
The Hallaton hoard included the Hallaton helmet, coins and other items from the Iron Age and the Roman era, and throws an interesting new light on the nature of ...

Humans Inhabited an Underwater City in North Sea, Evidence ...www.businessinsider.com › ... › International
Jul 12, 2019 — Archaeologists have discovered a Stone Age settlement that lies today on the bottom of the North. Archaeologists discovered a Stone Age ...

6 Lost cities found underwater around the world - Musafirin.musafir.com › Blog › 6-submerged-cities-around-the...
6 Lost cities found underwater around the world · 1. Dwarka - India · 2. Port Royal - Jamaica · 3. Pyramids of Yonaguni Jima - Japan · 4. Lion City - China · 5.

These 5 Incredible Underwater Ancient Cities Will Blow You ...www.natureworldnews.com › articles › 5-incredible-un...
Jun 29, 2016 — #3 The Pyramids of Yonaguni-Jima, Japan. Believed to be a built during the last ice age at 10,000 BCE, this mysterious underwater ruin is still ...


MZEE WA SIKU
 
Posts: 27473 | Registered: 03 February 2003Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
500 Underwater Ruins Discovered so far Around the World

Between 17,000 years ago and 7000 years ago, at the end of the last Ice Age, terrible things happened to the world our ancestors lived in. Great ice caps over northern Europe and north America melted down creating huge floods that ripped across the earth. Sea-level rose by more than 100 metres, and about 25 million square kilometres of formerly habitable lands were swallowed up by the waves creating underwater ruins.


MZEE WA SIKU
 
Posts: 27473 | Registered: 03 February 2003Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
quote:
about 25 million square kilometres of formerly habitable lands were swallowed up


That is about 9 mil sq miles , about the size of North America...


MZEE WA SIKU
 
Posts: 27473 | Registered: 03 February 2003Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Grandpasez:
quote:
2004 is way above where it should be.



Exactly and do you know why........

The why is poorly sited weather stations/thermometers, being affected by the urban heating

of the cities and airports getting built up around/next to them , giving readings that are applied to much larger cooler

geographic areas, and added into the averages, to repreaent those large areas,......

About a quarter of the stations are poorly sited, that way...

Warming is being claimed due to raises in the average of fractions of degrees and a quarter of the stations

input that on average read 3-4 deg too high , it is easy to see what has happened.

On the chart they claim warming with less than 1/2 degree of rise but all that rise

is from some of the thermometers just measuring sun heated blacktop and concrete....It is phony..


You really think that all claims of climate change are based on some badly placed thermometers? Because, you assume, many of those thermometers are placed in cities? And, that these cities are warmer, therefor, the readings are too high. At the same time, you assume that the heat of the cities has no effect whatsoever.

If you would replace all those weather stations to cooler areas, aren't you misplacing them to biased cooler places?

And if the earth isn't warming, why are all those glacier retreating then? Why is there so much less ice on the North Pole? And why is it so much thinner? Why are huge chunks of ice breaking off at Antarctica?
And that while the earth should be cooling down according to long-term natural cycles. Ice sheets and glaciers should be growing and thickening.
 
Posts: 378 | Registered: 08 October 2011Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
As crazy as Hubel is, there were articles in multiple papers about poorly placed thermometers. The kicker was, even though they admitted they shouldn't be there giving erroneous readings, they wouldn't change them.
 
Posts: 4511 | Registered: 10 April 2009Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
quote:
misplacing them to biased cooler pla



It is not biased. Like here in MI....Example- a station in Detroit a place of only 200 sq miles ,

reads to high by 4 deg but that temp is assigned to 20,000 sq miles of the state that is

not 4 deg too high but accual.. More honest to have station out in rural area giving honest reading

for 19,800 sq miles and then figure in Detroit's 1/100 of the area on top of that actual reading.......

Example if DET is 4 deg higher then 1/100 of that is .04 deg, which is added to actual rural reading.

That adds in the effect of that city...

But remember you are claiming warming due to CO2, and you are wanting to add in, or keep

in human warming effects, the urban heating effect of that city, that isn't CO2!!!!!!


MZEE WA SIKU
 
Posts: 27473 | Registered: 03 February 2003Reply With Quote
one of us
posted Hide Post
quote:
glacier retreating then? Why is there so much less ice on the North Pole


That is due to the oceans climate/temperature shifts to the north, like in the pacific

called LA NINA, but the areas in the southern hemisphere that heat moved away from are

cooler and when/if averaged out there is no worldwide warming, and when poorly sited thermometers are

corrected for, there is a little cooling.....And that cooling overall matches the slight

reduction being measured in the suns output.........It is the sun, not CO2.......


MZEE WA SIKU
 
Posts: 27473 | Registered: 03 February 2003Reply With Quote
  Powered by Social Strata Page 1 2 3 4  
 


Copyright December 1997-2021 Accuratereloading.com


Visit our on-line store for AR Memorabilia