I'm just going to worry about the beer supply and make sure we have an ample amount of coke and hookers.

You scientist-types take care of the rest. We're all counting on you.

So yesterday the UK was going to be the new south of France and today they'll be ice skating on the Thames .
/Brought to you by the ministry of pulling things out of my ass.

Snarfangel: We will have winters where temperatures above 100 degrees are common, and summers where it rarely gets above freezing!

The worst part of that is I'll have to throw out all my winter and summer clothes and get new ones.

I remember the these same cooling predictions which were made back in the 1970's.

However the Warmingists claim those predictions were never made. So in couple years expect them to claim this article never existed.

NFA: However the Warmingists claim those predictions were never made.

I don't recall anyone ever saying that. I recall people looking over the news articles of the time and finding that only about 10% of climate scientists predicted massive cooling and the majority even then were predicting the warming trend we are still on.

NFA: I remember the these same cooling predictions which were made back in the 1970's.

However the Warmingists claim those predictions were never made. So in couple years expect them to claim this article never existed.

I remember when folks actually at least pretended to understand the science.

Here's the funny thing: we shut down the thermohaline circulation cycle by dumping a crap ton of fresh water at the poles, we could very well kick off an Ice Age. That is my real fear with this: not "global warming" but very real and lasting climatic change.

We kill the thermohaline circulation, we're going to see systemic changes in climate across the globe. And lasting ones, because it will take a long while things to recombobulate.

hubiestubert: we shut down the thermohaline circulation cycle by dumping a crap ton of fresh water at the poles, we could very well kick off an Ice Age.

The good news is that the IPCC commissions have found that is likely not to happen. They believe that it is only likely to be reduced to about half strength. Which of course isn't to say it couldn't happen, but from the best data we have so far, there simply isn't a strong enough fresh water pulse to do it. The Younger Dryas cooling probably came from a glacial lake rapidly emptying down the St. Lawrence, and that amount of freshwater was enough to kill the circulation. There isn't a comparable event likely to happen.

GAT_00: hubiestubert: we shut down the thermohaline circulation cycle by dumping a crap ton of fresh water at the poles, we could very well kick off an Ice Age.

The good news is that the IPCC commissions have found that is likely not to happen. They believe that it is only likely to be reduced to about half strength. Which of course isn't to say it couldn't happen, but from the best data we have so far, there simply isn't a strong enough fresh water pulse to do it. The Younger Dryas cooling probably came from a glacial lake rapidly emptying down the St. Lawrence, and that amount of freshwater was enough to kill the circulation. There isn't a comparable event likely to happen.

Here's hoping. The problem is that we have folks who reflexively pop off that "climate change" is bunk, without trying to understand what is actually going on. Worse, they think that everything is instant. That fluctuations are always and forever...

The supposed 'consensus' on man-made global warming is facing an inconvenient challenge after the release of new temperature data showing the planet has not warmed for the past 15 years.

It's nice when an article does you the favor of showing it's all BS right from the start. Save so much time.

We're still in the last ice age, last I heard.

/course, I'm old.

As usual, liars like to take advantage of the fact that the temperature increase graph is a sawtooth to cherry-pick the peak 10 or 15 years ago with the valley this year. In 10 years, you'll never hear about 1998 again. You'll hear all about how 2013 was way warmer than 2022, so obviously it's cooling.

The thing is, they know they're cherry-picking. But they are running out of scientists who are "skeptics" and just KNOW it can't be true, because it just CAN'T be.

This thread is way too civil. Mods aren't going to like that.

edmo: We're still in the last ice age, last I heard.

/course, I'm old.

We're in an interglacial, not an ice age. If you're being very technical, the existence of the Antarctic Ice Sheet means this is an ice age and has been one for more than 2 million years, but that isn't the same thing as the last height of glaciation 15,000 years ago. That's why the term 'interglacial' is correct, to indicate that we are in an ice age, but in a warm period of one.

what NASA GISS "adjustments" look like:


only way they can show a warming trend is to cool the past. farking science, how does it work?

DesertDemonWY: what NASA GISS "adjustments" look like:
[wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com image 640x1024]

only way they can show a warming trend is to cool the past. farking science, how does it work?

Hey look, someone showed you some graphs! That's nice. I guess data can never be corrected, ever.

GAT_00: DesertDemonWY: what NASA GISS "adjustments" look like:
[wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com image 640x1024]

only way they can show a warming trend is to cool the past. farking science, how does it work?

Hey look, someone showed you some graphs! That's nice. I guess data can never be corrected, ever be "corrected" to fit the narrative.

FTFY

/Corrected for Ninjas.

FFS, not this shiat again.

DesertDemonWY: only way they can show a warming trend is to cool the past. farking science, how does it work?

LOL I bet the thermometers were next to the air conditioning exhaust vents amirite!

So global warming means we're all going to fry to death, except for when it means we're all going to freeze to death. How about the sky? Find any chunks of it on the ground lately?

DesertDemonWY: GAT_00: DesertDemonWY: what NASA GISS "adjustments" look like:
[wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com image 640x1024]

only way they can show a warming trend is to cool the past. farking science, how does it work?

Hey look, someone showed you some graphs! That's nice. I guess data can never be corrected, ever be "corrected" to fit the narrative.

FTFY

Oh wow, you put quotes around it. How quaint. Now run along and tell the RNC you totally disproved climate change.

Smeggy Smurf: St_Francis_P: [1.bp.blogspot.com image 471x317]

/Corrected for Ninjas.

That chart is obsolete. Come back with corrections for the Somali pirates and the pending ice age

It's a little out-of-date, true; but it's one of the few charts that most Farkers can agree on.

General GreenJeans:The only people saying it is going to be hotter in the decade-range future are those still pushing the carbon dioxide hoax.

You and your dumbass green comments are always an annoying part of any AGW thread. Yes, that "carbon dioxide hoax". You've got us there. The only ones who say anything about carbon dioxide are just about any climate scientist you ask. But, I forget, they're all in the pay of algore.

Go away and take your #66FF66 tag with you.

HotIgneous Intruder: /If someone really rips your goat, there's always the ignore, list oreo roller.

The ignore list is for pussies. I just flag single-issue dumbasses like you and General James in peach so I know who I'm dealing with. Sometimes I can just let the retardedness roll off my back, other times I have to say something. Today is a day my patience ran out. It helps that His Jimness thinks his rantings are worthy of coloring. And he's never said anything worthy elsewhere, unlike other peach people. You're fine in other threads, it's just AGW bring out your derp side.

/I love Oreos.

HotIgneous Intruder: The CO2 toadies see their science and careers through lenses of a single color, that of peer acceptance and job security. Science sees what is, not what you think it will be, as defined by group delusion, which in this case is strangely similar to religion.

You keep saying these things, but they're patently not true. There's no payout at the end of the rainbow for acklowledging that the carbon cycle is a critical key to temperature regulation in the atmosphere. This has been known since the days of Lord Kelvin, for crissake. And it has never been disputed until the rise in basal temperature made people say, maybe we should do something about this, which got the defenders of the status quo up in arms, because their business is unearthing sequestered carbon from fossil deposits.

I don't understand, frankly, you're a reasonably intelligent guy, but mention AGW and you go ballistic.

J. Frank Parnell: AND HOW THERE HAS BEEN ZERO CHANGE IN THIS PROCESS.

Are you watching the same video I am?