Dear Climate Change Deniers by T-Dawg - Page 118 - TribalWar Forums
Click Here to find great hosting deals from Branzone.com


Go Back   TribalWar Forums > TribalWar Community > General Discussion
Reload this Page Dear Climate Change Deniers
Page 118 of 159
Thread Tools
Kismet
Veteran
Old
2341 - 06-26-2014, 21:50
Reply With Quote
any1 post about the scientist offering 10k for anyone to prove that global warming or climate change due to fossil fuel abuse isnt real

phyzx should enter he is a wizard just like tehvul
 
Kismet is offline
 
Sponsored Links
Captain Tele
Veteran³
Immigrant
Old
2342 - 06-26-2014, 21:52
Reply With Quote
brain damaged dare calling you out

one new c02 snot bubble at a time
 
Captain Tele is offline
 
-SS-
Veteran++
Old
2343 - 06-26-2014, 21:57
Reply With Quote
These leaps that you somehow support "dirty air and dirty water" just because you dont believe that CO2 is contributing to a [data manipulated] hypothesis thats being trotted about as 'consensus' and 'the science is settled' is pretty comical and extremely stupid.

I'd like to see where people dont approve of good stewardship of our resources. Littering and dumping waste into our resources should be severely punished.
 
-SS- is offline
 
beltaine1
Veteran²
Old
2344 - 06-26-2014, 22:07
Reply With Quote
Dare is a brain damaged idiot. The kid needs to worry about recovering instead of obsessing over Tribalwar. All bull**** aside. What has he contributed here at TW besides nothing? That's right. Nothing just like the nothing he is.
 
beltaine1 is offline
 
Phyzx
VeteranXV
Old
2345 - 06-26-2014, 22:39
Reply With Quote
 
Phyzx is offline
 
beltaine1
Veteran²
Old
2346 - 06-27-2014, 01:52
Reply With Quote
ICFire go **** yourself.

The scandal of fiddled global warming data - Telegraph

Quote:
The damning graphs published on the ***8216;Real Science***8217; blog by Steven Goddard, the nom de plume of a self-described ***8216;lifelong environmentalist***8217; with graduate-level scientific credentials. They show the impact of replacing the real measurements with computer-generated estimates, in an alleged scheme to de-emphasize temperature readings from earlier decades while giving added weight to more recent numbers.
NOAA And NASA Data Alterations Are Global

Iceland





Australia



Quote:
the data was over 40% fabricated so far in 2014.


Those ****ing guys are a disgrace to Science. Screaming Global Warming knowing damned well it was complete bull****.

 
beltaine1 is offline
 
Last edited by beltaine1; 06-27-2014 at 02:03..
lemon
Sour++
Contributor
Old
2347 - 06-27-2014, 01:56
Reply With Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by beltaine1 View Post

The scandal of fiddled global warming data - Telegraph
Quote:
Originally Posted by beltaine1 View Post

The scandal of fiddled global warming data - Telegraph
Now you're just repeating yourself. Take the meds red.
 
lemon is offline
 
beltaine1
Veteran²
Old
2348 - 06-27-2014, 02:14
Reply With Quote
Shut up stupid.

Those so called Scientist and Al Gore should be burned at the stake for brainwashing an entire generation.

Quote:
If government employees are going to alter data to reverse measured cooling trends into warming trends, it is absolutely essential that each and every graph is clearly marked as altered. Otherwise, people might accidentally confuse it as being legitimate.

And if you point out that they have altered the data, they use their government funded salaries to publicly say that your analysis is faulty. These aren***8217;t my graphs. They are NASA graphs. It isn***8217;t my analysis, it is NASA***8217;s analysis.

Obviously we should just blindly accept everything government employees say.
 
beltaine1 is offline
 
Pirate Steve
VeteranXV
Old
2349 - 06-27-2014, 02:47
Reply With Quote
the government lies to you about everything.

those ****ing liars.
 
Pirate Steve is offline
 
beltaine1
Veteran²
Old
2350 - 06-27-2014, 03:00
Reply With Quote
Folks got lied to in a major way. On record proven. No doubt about it. The cat is out of the bag. Global Warming was a lie. Better invest in a good coat. Real talk.
 
beltaine1 is offline
 
Phyzx
VeteranXV
Old
2351 - 06-27-2014, 07:46
Reply With Quote
If you want to read a VERY good analysis of a single station's "adjustments", I would recommend heading over to Paul Homewood's (warmist) site, and reading his write-up on Luling Texas. Unlike Goddard, he goes into detail and provides links directly to all the data, so that you can check his work for yourself.

Quote:
In other words, the adjustments have added an astonishing 1.35C to the annual temperature for 2013. Note also that I have included the same figures for 1934, which show that the adjustment has reduced temperatures that year by 0.91C. So, the net effect of the adjustments between 1934 and 2013 has been to add 2.26C of warming.
Massive Temperature Adjustments At Luling, Texas | NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT
 
Phyzx is offline
 
Phyzx
VeteranXV
Old
2352 - 06-28-2014, 19:51
Reply With Quote
This data tampering conversation just exploded this weekend.

It appears that Steven Goddard (probably one of the most radical of conspiracy theorists against AGW) might of hit paydirt. After being attacked by fellow skeptics this week, it appears that many people are now digging into this subject and validating (to some degree) the amount of data corruption that has been systematically been happening to US historical temperature records.

Quote:
From:John Nielsen-Gammon
Sent: Friday, June 27, 2014 9:27 AM
To: Anthony
Subject: Re: USHCN station at Luling Texas

Anthony -

I just did a check of all Texas USHCN stations. Thirteen had estimates in place of apparently good data.

410174 Estimated May 2008 thru June 2009

410498 Estimated since Oct 2011

410639 Estimated since July 2012 (exc Feb-Mar 2012, Nov 2012, Mar 2013, and May 2013)

410902 Estimated since Aug 2013

411048 Estimated July 2012 thru Feb 2014

412906 Estimated since Jan 2013

413240 Estimated since March 2013

413280 Estimated since Oct 2012

415018 Estimated since April 2010, defunct since Dec 2012

415429 Estimated since May 2013

416276 Estimated since Nov 2012

417945 Estimated since May 2013

418201 Estimated since April 2013 (except Dec 2013).

What is going on is that the USHCN code is that while the RAW data file has the actual measurements, for some reason the final data they publish doesn’t get the memo that good data is actually present for these stations, so it “infills” it with estimated data using data from surrounding stations. It’s a bug, a big one. And as Zeke did a cursory analysis Thursday night, he discovered it was systemic to the entire record, and up to 10% of stations have “estimated” data spanning over a century:
 
Phyzx is offline
 
brick
Veteran++
Old
2353 - 06-28-2014, 21:37
Reply With Quote
do you have an equation for how the data has been tampered with, phyzx?
 
brick is offline
 
RallyKazoo
VeteranX
Old
2354 - 06-28-2014, 21:48
Reply With Quote
More like an eGAYtion, amirite?
 
RallyKazoo is offline
 
beltaine1
Veteran²
Old
2355 - 06-28-2014, 21:56
Reply With Quote
Like I said. Thank you for playing.

/thread
 
beltaine1 is offline
 
Phyzx
VeteranXV
Old
2356 - 06-28-2014, 22:32
Reply With Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by brick View Post
do you have an equation for how the data has been tampered with, phyzx?
consensus = owned
 
Phyzx is offline
 
Vanster
VeteranXV
Contributor
Old
2357 - 06-28-2014, 22:51
Reply With Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phyzx View Post
Why make the y-axis go to 120?

(I'm not really asking, I know why they did it, I'm just hoping you will think about it)
 
Vanster is offline
 
Phyzx
VeteranXV
Old
2358 - 06-28-2014, 22:54
Reply With Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vanster View Post
Why make the y-axis go to 120?

(I'm not really asking, I know why they did it, I'm just hoping you will think about it)

probably for the same reason the current administration has been manipulating the X axis for so long.

It's all about perception.
 
Phyzx is offline
 
brick
Veteran++
Old
2359 - 06-28-2014, 22:55
Reply With Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phyzx View Post
consensus = owned
uh what? weren't you the one clambering about how a concensus doesn't mean anything about CO2 because there wasn't an equation to back up the consensus?
 
brick is offline
 
Phyzx
VeteranXV
Old
2360 - 06-28-2014, 23:03
Reply With Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by brick View Post
uh what? weren't you the one clambering about how a concensus doesn't mean anything about CO2 because there wasn't an equation to back up the consensus?
yes I was.

glad you're paying attention.

a "consensus" on a hypothesis = absolutely jack ****.
 
Phyzx is offline
 
Page 118 of 159
Reply


Go Back   TribalWar Forums > TribalWar Community > General Discussion
Reload this Page Dear Climate Change Deniers

Social Website Bullshit

Tags
ass mode , climate change deniers , want bigger gubmt sooooooo bad


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


AGENT: CCBot/2.0 (https://commoncrawl.org/faq/) / Y
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:56.