In article ,
says...
On Mon, 11 May 2009 21:31:47 -0500, "Amused" wrote:

You just made the post originator look like a total dumbass.


"BobLl" wrote in message
...
Roger Coppock wrote:
Please see:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/videos/2...hurricanes.htm

Don't miss the video, either.

Did you even read the article? He asserts without basis "The increase has
been 1 degree Fahrenheit, resulting in four percent more atmospheric water
vapor and six to eight percent more rainfall." He provides no data at all
supporting stronger hurricanes. Furthrmore he's only talking about the
North Atlantic, not the globe. More half baked AGW crap.

From your own source:

"Global Warming Will Do Little To Change Hurricane Activity, According To
New Model"
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0812160615.htm

"Natural Climate Changes Can Intensify Hurricanes More Efficiently Than
Global Warming"
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...1212201954.htm

"Warmer Ocean Could Reduce Number Of Atlantic Hurricane Landfalls"
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0124115808.htm

"Global Warming Increases Wind Shear, Reduces Hurricanes, Climate Model
Shows"
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0417182843.htm

"Global Warming Has Little Impact In Tropical Storm And Hurricane Numbers,
NOAA Reports"
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0519134306.htm

Not exactly a consensus on this issue.


Don't you understand, Global Warming is all there is, it
causes everything, it even causes Global Cooling.

Apparently it causes both stronger and weaker hurricanes. Both more and
less hurricanes also.

John Black

On Mon, 11 May 2009 22:05:58 -0400, BobLl wrote:

Roger Coppock wrote:
Please see:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/videos/2...hurricanes.htm

Don't miss the video, either.

Did you even read the article? He asserts without basis "The increase has
been 1 degree Fahrenheit, resulting in four percent more atmospheric water
vapor and six to eight percent more rainfall." He provides no data at all
supporting stronger hurricanes. Furthrmore he's only talking about the
North Atlantic, not the globe. More half baked AGW crap.

From your own source:

"Global Warming Will Do Little To Change Hurricane Activity, According To
New Model"
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0812160615.htm

"Natural Climate Changes Can Intensify Hurricanes More Efficiently Than
Global Warming"
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...1212201954.htm

"Warmer Ocean Could Reduce Number Of Atlantic Hurricane Landfalls"
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0124115808.htm

"Global Warming Increases Wind Shear, Reduces Hurricanes, Climate Model
Shows"
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0417182843.htm

"Global Warming Has Little Impact In Tropical Storm And Hurricane Numbers,
NOAA Reports"
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0519134306.htm

Not exactly a consensus on this issue.

Consensus requires clear evidence. Lack of consensus is usually caused by:
1) Faulty research methods
2) lack of evidence

GW is abundant in both areas of failure. The disasters predicted are not
even close. Data collection methods on the ground is faulty. Computer
models are proven flawed. insufficient historic data (full cycles of
warmer and cooler time periods). Interpretation is not grounded in proven
theories. ad nauseaum.

Michael Dobony wrote:
On Mon, 11 May 2009 22:05:58 -0400, BobLl wrote:

Roger Coppock wrote:
Please see:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/videos/2...hurricanes.htm

Don't miss the video, either.

Did you even read the article? He asserts without basis "The
increase has been 1 degree Fahrenheit, resulting in four percent
more atmospheric water vapor and six to eight percent more
rainfall." He provides no data at all supporting stronger
hurricanes. Furthrmore he's only talking about the North Atlantic,
not the globe. More half baked AGW crap.

From your own source:

"Global Warming Will Do Little To Change Hurricane Activity,
According To New Model"
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0812160615.htm

"Natural Climate Changes Can Intensify Hurricanes More Efficiently
Than Global Warming"
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...1212201954.htm

"Warmer Ocean Could Reduce Number Of Atlantic Hurricane Landfalls"
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0124115808.htm

"Global Warming Increases Wind Shear, Reduces Hurricanes, Climate
Model Shows"
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0417182843.htm

"Global Warming Has Little Impact In Tropical Storm And Hurricane
Numbers, NOAA Reports"
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0519134306.htm

Not exactly a consensus on this issue.

Consensus requires clear evidence. Lack of consensus is usually
caused by: 1) Faulty research methods
2) lack of evidence

GW is abundant in both areas of failure.

A lie.

The disasters predicted are
not even close.

Made-up crap.

Data collection methods on the ground is faulty.

Not really, no. It pretty much matches other sources.

Computer models are proven flawed.

Nope.

insufficient historic data (full
cycles of warmer and cooler time periods).

Nope.

Interpretation is not
grounded in proven theories.

Nope.

ad nauseaum.

You are the guy who told us the sun was 10,000 years old, yes?

On May 13, 1:22*pm, Michael Dobony wrote:
On Mon, 11 May 2009 22:05:58 -0400, BobLl wrote:
Roger Coppock wrote:
Please see:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/videos/2...ming_equals_st....

Don't miss the video, either.

Did you even read the article? *He asserts without basis "The increase has
been 1 degree Fahrenheit, resulting in four percent more atmospheric water
vapor and six to eight percent more rainfall." *He provides no data at all
supporting stronger hurricanes. *Furthrmore he's only talking about the
North Atlantic, not the globe. * More half baked AGW crap.

From your own source:

"Global Warming Will Do Little To Change Hurricane Activity, According To
New Model"
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0812160615.htm

"Natural Climate Changes Can Intensify Hurricanes More Efficiently Than
Global Warming"
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...1212201954.htm

"Warmer Ocean Could Reduce Number Of Atlantic Hurricane Landfalls"
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0124115808.htm

"Global Warming Increases Wind Shear, Reduces Hurricanes, Climate Model
Shows"
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0417182843.htm

"Global Warming Has Little Impact In Tropical Storm And Hurricane Numbers,
NOAA Reports"
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0519134306.htm

Not exactly a consensus on this issue.

Consensus requires clear evidence. *Lack of consensus is usually caused by:
1) Faulty research methods
2) lack of evidence

GW is abundant in both areas of failure. *The disasters predicted are not
even close. *

No one has predicted any disasters by 2009


Data collection methods on the ground is faulty. *
Lie 2



Computer
models are proven flawed. *

Lie 3

insufficient historic data (full cycles of
warmer and cooler time periods).

Lie 4

*Interpretation is not grounded in proven
theories.

Lie 5

*ad nauseaum.

Look, if you don't understand the science, just say so. But making up
falsehoods to cover your ignorance is foolish, like a person who gets
caught cheating and comes up with "it doesn't say specifically you
can't use wikipedia and it doesn't say every reference has to be in
there and you didn't remind us in class"

"Michael Dobony" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 11 May 2009 22:05:58 -0400, BobLl wrote:


Not exactly a consensus on this issue.

Consensus requires clear evidence. Lack of consensus is usually caused
by:
1) Faulty research methods
2) lack of evidence

You left out corruption. But, "Consensus" is a social interpretation of
facts. Physical reality will continue with or without consensus.

GW is abundant in both areas of failure. The disasters predicted are not
even close. Data collection methods on the ground is faulty. Computer
models are proven flawed. insufficient historic data (full cycles of
warmer and cooler time periods). Interpretation is not grounded in proven
theories. ad nauseaum.

Historical temperature measurements by direct observation are insufficient,
but proxy observations are sufficient to say that the Holocene Earth is in
an interglacial period caused by Milankovitch forcing. The only "change"
that is certain is that we will fall back into another glacial.

On Wed, 13 May 2009 10:38:00 -0500, John Black wrote:

In article ,
says...
On Mon, 11 May 2009 21:31:47 -0500, "Amused" wrote:

You just made the post originator look like a total dumbass.


"BobLl" wrote in message
...
Roger Coppock wrote:
Please see:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/videos/2...hurricanes.htm

Don't miss the video, either.

Did you even read the article? He asserts without basis "The increase has
been 1 degree Fahrenheit, resulting in four percent more atmospheric water
vapor and six to eight percent more rainfall." He provides no data at all
supporting stronger hurricanes. Furthrmore he's only talking about the
North Atlantic, not the globe. More half baked AGW crap.

From your own source:

"Global Warming Will Do Little To Change Hurricane Activity, According To
New Model"
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0812160615.htm

"Natural Climate Changes Can Intensify Hurricanes More Efficiently Than
Global Warming"
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...1212201954.htm

"Warmer Ocean Could Reduce Number Of Atlantic Hurricane Landfalls"
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0124115808.htm

"Global Warming Increases Wind Shear, Reduces Hurricanes, Climate Model
Shows"
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0417182843.htm

"Global Warming Has Little Impact In Tropical Storm And Hurricane Numbers,
NOAA Reports"
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0519134306.htm

Not exactly a consensus on this issue.


Don't you understand, Global Warming is all there is, it
causes everything, it even causes Global Cooling.

Apparently it causes both stronger and weaker hurricanes. Both more and
less hurricanes also.

John Black

Could it have caused those twins with two different fathers?

On May 13, 4:12*pm, "bw" wrote:
"Michael Dobony" wrote in message

...

On Mon, 11 May 2009 22:05:58 -0400, BobLl wrote:

Not exactly a consensus on this issue.

Consensus requires clear evidence. *Lack of consensus is usually caused
by:
1) Faulty research methods
2) lack of evidence

You left out corruption. But, "Consensus" is a social interpretation of
facts. Physical reality will continue with or without consensus.


And science will continue with or without idiots like you accepting
it.

GW is abundant in both areas of failure. *The disasters predicted are not
even close. *Data collection methods on the ground is faulty. *Computer
models are proven flawed. *insufficient historic data (full cycles of
warmer and cooler time periods). *Interpretation is not grounded in proven
theories. *ad nauseaum.

Historical temperature measurements by direct observation are insufficient,
but proxy observations are sufficient to say that the Holocene Earth is in
an interglacial period caused by Milankovitch forcing.


They also say we should be in the cooling part of the cycle not the
warming. Yet we are warming.

The only "change"
that is certain is that we will fall back into another glacial.

On May 11, 5:31*pm, Roger Coppock wrote:
On May 11, 4:55*pm, "
wrote:
[ . . . ]

* The oceans have been cooling over the last 5 years

Your local junior college probably has a course in
statistics. *There, you could learn about variance
and statistical significance. *Given the variances
in temperature data sets, anyone who claims a
climate trend only 5 years long is a total fool.

According to the AGWers, the heat budget of the earth is currently
out of balance. It's receiving more heat than it's radiating away,
gradually warming. Those joules of heat must be going into the
oceans if the atmospher is not warming up. The fact that the oceans
have cooled over the last 5 years contradicts the hypothesis that the
current energy budget is out of balance. If the excess heat over the
last 5 years has not gone into warming the oceans, just where is it?-
A. McIntre

On May 12, 8:08*am, "marcodbeast" wrote:
wrote:
On May 11, 4:25 pm, Roger Coppock wrote:
Please see:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/videos/2...ming_equals_st....

Don't miss the video, either.

* The oceans have been cooling over the last 5 years

http://climatesci.org/

* Sorry, k00ksite.

Then why does realclimate list it it their "other opinions" menu?-
A. McIntire