US coasts sea level rise 10 to 12 inches by 2050

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by jackdale

Check your URL

This site can’t be reached
Check if there is a typo in iwasnotssl-www.drroyspencer.com.
If spelling is correct, try running Windows Network Diagnostics.
DNS_PROBE_FINISHED_NXDOMAIN

Try again worked fine on my phone here on my boat

[Dieseldude]

Originally Posted by jackdale

The Medieval Warming Period was not global. It was described by Hubert Lamb using anecdotal data from Central England, which is neither temporally or spatially representative of the rest of the Earth.



Neukom, R., Steiger, N., Gómez-Navarro, J.J. et al. No evidence for globally coherent warm and cold periods over the preindustrial Common Era. Nature 571, 550–554 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-019-1401-2

The increase in CO2 is not from the oceans. Carbon isotope analysis of the ratios of C14, C13, and C12 attribute the 50% increase in atmospheric CO2 over that past 2.5 centuries to the burning of fossil fuels.



https://www.climate.gov/news-feature...-caused-humans

The medieval warming period is based upon historical records, as is the little ice age. It cannot be dismissed as anecdotal. Labeling information as anecdotal does not invalidate it. If that were the case, court room testimony would not be valid. When a witness gives testimony, he or she is telling an anecdote. Yet offenders are sentenced for major crimes or innocent persons are exonerated based upon such anecdotes.


If CO2 that is now in the ground used to be in the atmosphere, what harm is there to liberating it back to the atmosphere? It seemed that the world was ok, with diverse species back then, so it should be ok now. Vulcanos have been venting CO2 for millennia, and life has flourished.


It is inconceivable that climate variation could have occurred in an area as large as the British Isles, Greenland, and Iceland without the rest of the world having been affected. There have been no walls around this vast area.

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by Dieseldude

The medieval warming period is based upon historical records, as is the little ice age. It cannot be dismissed as anecdotal. Labeling information as anecdotal does not invalidate it. If that were the case, court room testimony would not be valid. When a witness gives testimony, he or she is telling an anecdote. Yet offenders are sentenced for major crimes or innocent persons are exonerated based upon such anecdotes.


If CO2 that is now in the ground used to be in the atmosphere, what harm is there to liberating it back to the atmosphere? It seemed that the world was ok, with diverse species back then, so it should be ok now. Vulcanos have been venting CO2 for millennia, and life has flourished.


It is inconceivable that climate variation could have occurred in an area as large as the British Isles, Greenland, and Iceland without the rest of the world having been affected. There have been no walls around this vast area.

I have posted the data for the MWP and the LIA being global but they don't like the source .

https://www.netzerowatch.com/medieva...south-america/

[lestersails]

Originally Posted by Dieseldude

Complex formulas can have built in biases to achieve an intended result.

Conspiracy theories again. A core part of denialist nonsense.

[jackdale]

Originally Posted by newhaul

Try again worked fine on my phone here on my boat

urls do not start with " iwasnotssl"

[jackdale]

Originally Posted by Dieseldude

The medieval warming period is based upon historical records, as is the little ice age. It cannot be dismissed as anecdotal. Labeling information as anecdotal does not invalidate it. If that were the case, court room testimony would not be valid. When a witness gives testimony, he or she is telling an anecdote. Yet offenders are sentenced for major crimes or innocent persons are exonerated based upon such anecdotes.


If CO2 that is now in the ground used to be in the atmosphere, what harm is there to liberating it back to the atmosphere? It seemed that the world was ok, with diverse species back then, so it should be ok now. Vulcanos (sic) have been venting CO2 for millennia, and life has flourished.


It is inconceivable that climate variation could have occurred in an area as large as the British Isles, Greenland, and Iceland without the rest of the world having been affected. There have been no walls around this vast area.

Page 2K (the source for the journal article I posted) uses close to 700 data sets world wide.

Volcanoes emit about 1% as much CO2 as human activity.

https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley....9/2011EO240001

Homo sapiens evolved and their food crops were domesticated in an atmosphere that never exceeded 300 ppm CO2.

[AllenRbrts]

Originally Posted by newhaul

Now do what was asked and just list it by year not cherry months in a year .

How did I get to be your data slave???
1/1/2002 0.389
1/1/2003 0.405
1/1/2007 0.418
1/1/2013 0.430
1/1/2005 0.469
1/1/2014 0.486
1/1/2018 0.543
1/1/1998 0.581
1/1/2015 0.616
1/1/2021 0.617
1/1/2010 0.622
1/1/2017 0.685
1/1/2019 0.750
1/1/2016 0.813
1/1/2020 0.814

Seems like a pretty clear trend to me, hotter hotter, hotter.... of course it is not surprising given the trend line of the entire dataset. How does this translate into cooling??? Take out 2016 and 1998 (La Nina years).. and it even more clear.

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by jackdale

urls do not start with " iwasnotssl"

D0nt know what your problem is but here are a couple screens hots I just took and the link worked just fine .
Has to be operator error on your end .

[jackdale]

Originally Posted by newhaul

I have posted the data for the MWP and the LIA being global but they don't like the source .

https://www.netzerowatch.com/medieva...south-america/

Your source does not pass the CRAAP test.

[Bycrick]

An algorithm is nothing more than a guess. It depends on what data goes in, what manipulations the writer thinks is important. Once one tries to compensate for what is/isn’t/ might be important the "accuracy" can go sideways quickly. One doesn’t know what one got wrong unless on can generate predictions that can be tested. Since one can’t test a prediction out 50 years, what the model says is irrelevant.

It’s funny. There’s a huge fight about whether using "magic algorithms" is "fair" for things like sentencing convicted criminals, or figuring out your credit scores. The complaint is that they just reinforce existing biases. But somehow, the climate zealots think they’re good enough to justify trillions of dollars for unproven "solutions."

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by AllenRbrts

How did I get to be your data slave???
1/1/2002 0.389
1/1/2003 0.405
1/1/2007 0.418
1/1/2013 0.430
1/1/2005 0.469
1/1/2014 0.486
1/1/2018 0.543
1/1/1998 0.581
1/1/2015 0.616
1/1/2021 0.617
1/1/2010 0.622
1/1/2017 0.685
1/1/2019 0.750
1/1/2016 0.813
1/1/2020 0.814

Seems like a pretty clear trend to me, hotter hotter, hotter.... of course it is not surprising given the trend line of the entire dataset. How does this translate into cooling??? Take out 2016 and 1998 (La Nina years).. and it even more clear.

Take out the RSS adjustment 5hat was done in 2018 bringing their numbers in line with the Ipcc required and you have it out to a .001 or 1/1000% lower than the difference from your toes to your knees in your house.

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by jackdale

Your source does not pass the CRAAP test.

Your dissent was fully expected and yes it meets the CRAAP TEST
But likely not to a retired high school gym teacher

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by Bycrick

An algorithm is nothing more than a guess. ...

So you don't understand algorithms either.

(Ok, I get the point you're striving for, but such imprecision doesn't generate any confidence that you know what you're talking about)

[jackdale]

Originally Posted by newhaul

Your dissent was fully expected and yes it meets the CRAAP TEST
But likely not to a retired high school gym teacher

Let us start with currency

Currency can be more important in some fields, like science and medicine, than in some other fields, like those in the humanities, but having current information is usually recommended. Considering currency is important, though, so you are not using information that has been supplanted with new, better ideas and research.

Yours - Tuesday 24th May 2011 (fail)

Mine - 24 July 2019 (pass)

[Dieseldude]

Originally Posted by lestersails

Conspiracy theories again. A core part of denialist nonsense.

Some conspiracy theories have been proven as conspiracy fact. Dr. Tim Ball was exonerated by the British Columbia Supreme court in Dr. Michael Mann's libel case against him. The climategate leaked emails from the University of East Anglia Climate Unit proved the fraud of their climate scientists, and others in the world wide climate research community.


In the wider world of conspiracy, the influence of the CIA on mass media known as Operation Mockingbird was proven true by the Church Committee. MK Ultra was proven true. This was the dosing of experimental hallucinogenic drugs to unsuspecting or unconsenting persons.



In October 1990, a fifteen-year-old Kuwaiti girl, Nayirah, gave a harrowing testimony before the Congressional Human Rights Caucus, recounting inhumane atrocities committed by Iraqi soldiers in her country. It was credited for helping draw the U.S. into the Gulf War later that year. Her claims were ultimately refuted by evidence to the contrary, exposing deceptive motives and sources behind the ploy.


The Gulf of Tonkin incident allegedly on August 2, 1964 off the coast of Vietnam ws proven to never have happened.


Operation Gladio was exposed in Italy by the research of Italian judge Felice Casson. This was a state sponsored terrorist ring whose job it was to create public fear to influence public political opinion. Terror attacks in Europe can be traced to Gladio.



There are many more, but the point is, in modern times, governments and media have lied to the public on a grand scale over extremely important matters. Why would we trust them on anything now? Labeling those who challenge man made climate change as "conspiracy theorists" and "deniers" is only the gullible attempting to discredit the the thinkers by mere name calling. Conspiracies have existed since civilization began. What has happened in modern times to prevent them? In general, people now do not seem to be morally superior than they were in early recorded history.



"Who are you gonna believe, me or your own eyes?”- Groucho Marx