Hansen/NASA created US warming?

It would seem to me that those who are throwing around names are the worst deniers that exist. And they constantly make accusations that those who question the science don't know the science. Again...LoSiNg....

 

Science's problem is that it operates on questioning. Highly technical discussion can be impenetrable to the lay person, but making it accessible to them without "dumbing down" the information. Esoteric diagreements over fine points of interpretation, or necessary qualifying statements are seized on by deniers as putting the entire science in doubt. Deniers speak in certainty where science by its nature is more equivocal. (and honest.).

 

By not communicating the problems with historical data or the uncertainties, the true believer thinks what they say is Gospel. Right now they all think the failed computer models are what is reality when observational science has falsified them. Scientists are scrambling to find the hiding warming because it just has to be there by golly, the models said so.

 

Why are they against answering questions from the layperson? Is it perhaps a god like syndrome?

 

Your inability to understand the answers does not mean answers aren't given. We can only dumb things down so far. It's not possible to explain some concepts to chimp, or to a lot of people.

 

"Denier" is simply Internet shorthand for someone who refuses to accept that science has already asked these questions because they don't like the answer.

Exactly, Berkeley Earth was started because they agreed with arguments the skeptics were making about climate science. The fact that they reached a different conclusion should tell you something about the veracity of those arguments.

 

Well, it is certainly a giveaway when people call names FIRST. Giveaway for what exactly I don't know, but it appears to be sometimes a simple desire to NOT think about a topic. Believe first, call names second, but WHATEVER you do don't take any time to THINK about what is going on.

- - - Updated - - -

Problem?

 

Who is "we"? Schneider, the originator of the "scare them even if we don't understand the issue" angle, is dead. Do you mean you personally, or the climate gang that doesn't understand how the climate system works, or those who recognize that the climate scientists don't know how the climate works?

 

I already informed you, there are no "deniers" within the scientific process. Those who have done science know this. Why is it that the climate gang has invented a concept that doesn't exist inside of science, or claimed it is settled, to STOP the normal process of science from doing what it does really, really well? And that is, compare the empirical evidence to, in this case, some models that can't model? And then apparently have the AUDACITY to SAY it? Perfectly normal within the sciences, to ask this kind of question. Whereas your first instinct is to assign a name to those doing it…when science itself…does not.

 

So why does it bother you that someone refuses to accept it? So you're saying they have to accept it or else?

 

Accept whatever is being sold, or they call you a name. It is funny that you don't find scientists who do science using this kind of language, unless they have become politicized. And that is the real fear, that the science and scientists themselves are infected with the same disease that started back even before Schenider was telling people to sell..sell...sell the fear, because people were too stupid to understand what these ivory tower academics "knew".

Any scientist calling another a denier has already abandoned the core precepts of science, just as those who declare the science is "settled". They aren't approaching the questions from a position of science any more, but one of belief. And that is the tell.

 

What I've learned on the forums is this, the warmers know that 90% of the population doesn't understand anything. I've seen several videos that show this. They merely back up the fear because they know no better. I believe it is the utmost of importance to show those spreading the fear that there is a fight. They do not like the fight. And that is the reason why they name call. They believe they have the populas, however, the earth itself is hurting them. Someone who lives in an area where there are no changes are understanding that hey, my weatherman can't predict the weather more than 24 hours and even then can't hit 100% accuracy. Now you want me to believe things are extreme? the joke is on them. Each and everyone of the idiots on here hate us. They can't stand us, wish we'd go away. It makes me laugh, it makes me want to continue to get in their space. One does not need to be a scientist to observe the climate. And seasonally, it ain't changing.

And to any of our warmer k00ks who think there is more than seasonal climate change, show us where.

 

Here is an example of the misleading information given by (un)Skeptical Science.

Watts Up With That's ignorance regarding Antarctic sea ice

Unfortunately for Cook, the records can be checked. Bob Tisdale produces analyses of sea surface temperatures each month, and these have shown that the Southern Ocean has been getting considerable colder since 1981, and particularly in the last 8 years.

September 2014 Sea Surface Temperature (SST) Anomaly Update

 

Maybe they are talking about the two or three temperature stations they have is Western Antarctica, which is laughable to apply any changes to the whole continent.

 

You mean the whole globe correct?

any area in Australia and the Antarctic are the whole globe. the US, doesn't count as being in the globe.

 

You missed my point.

There are few station in the region to make any "in the ballpark" assessments.

If I am wrong, please give me a link that tells their locations and history.

 

No I understood exactly what you meant. I was actually attempting to extend what you said, and to state that those who use those three stations for the entire contintent also use them for the entire globe. I threw Australia in as well. Any area in Australia is considered the entire globe. Sorry, didn't do a good job with that one.

 

Indeed, and those records show that, as usual, Watts is just lying again.

If you actually read Cook's article, it says the surface was colder, while the deeper water was warmer. Watts neglects to mention that, and pretends Cook said the surface was warmer, something Cook never said or implied. Posting a graph showing colder surface water just confirms Cook was correct.

Hoosier, do you consider Watt's big lie justified in the name of the Cook Derangement Syndrome which you two both share, or are you willing to condemn Watt's lying here? Rhetorical question, I know. There's no way you'd ever dare contradict your cult leader, no matter how many whoppers he was caught in.

 

Watts didn't write the study or compile the data. Nice try at deflection. Guess where we have the fewest temperature records. Speaking of cult, where are all those 100+ predictions that never came true?

 

"Paul Homewood notes: According to John Cook, Antarctic sea ice has been expanding because the Southern Ocean is getting warmer. "

So, hoosier's defense is that since Watts was just repeating a lie from Homewood, it doesn't count as a lie from Watts.

Fascinating, these contortions that WUWT cultists will go into in order to avoid admitting their cult leaders lied.

 

OK, why is the ocean warmer...

Could it be all the geothermal activity? Is it only the western area, or in the eastern too?

Regardless, warmer waters cause more evaporation/precipitation, which in this case, is more ice.

 

What Cook said

So yes Cook specifically said thay rising surface temps cause ice to expand. He argued that rising surface temps cause more rain and snow which slows the circulation.

Now I don't know if what Mammoth is arguing is simple him miss reading Cook or Coom spreading this excuse because he knows that those who read his blog are to stupid to understand that what he is saying is a lie. Either or Mammoth is dead wrong.