[Freakinoldguy]

sandorski sandorski:

That's as far as I'm going to rebut. It's all been rebutted an infinite amount before, yet the Deniers continue in their ignorance. So carry on.

Why thank you for your magnificence. I guess ignorance is bliss, or in this case reality is alot less alarming than the chicken little attitude of the acolytes of the new religion, Global Warming want us to believe.

As far as I'm concerned these acolytes are nothing more than a larger than normal doomsday cult with a visible leadership and an even more tenuous grip on science.

[sandorski]

Freakinoldguy Freakinoldguy:

sandorski sandorski:

That's as far as I'm going to rebut. It's all been rebutted an infinite amount before, yet the Deniers continue in their ignorance. So carry on.

Why thank you for your magnificence. I guess ignorance is bliss, or in this case reality is alot less alarming than the chicken little attitude of the acolytes of the new religion, Global Warming want us to believe.

As far as I'm concerned these acolytes are nothing more than a larger than normal doomsday cult with a visible leadership and an even more tenuous grip on science.

You tell me, you're the Expert.

[Praxius]

N_Fiddledog N_Fiddledog:

This graph you posted is interesting Prax.

.........

It's a GISS graph. You can tell, because 2005 is higher than 1998. You won't see that on any other temperature set. What that means is it's a graph some alarmist has posted somewhere to make a point. In fact if you look at those green marks you can see him doing just that.

Even so there's stuff they can't hide. The scale is just 10ths of a degree. The actual rise there for the 20th century is only about .7 of a degree. If you looked at this over a larger, geologic time-scale of millions of years, you wouldn't even see that tiny spike.

The alarmist wants you take a quick glance at that magnified scale, and see a steady rise upward, but if you look at it carefully you'll see thirty year trends. 1880ish to 1910ish - level. 1910ish to 1940ish - up. 1940ish to 1970ish - down. 1970ish to 2000ish - up. Were still waiting for the next one, but at this point it looks like it's going down.

The twentieth century is not really a single upward trend. It's two upward 30 year trends, and one downward 30 year trend.

In the Pacific where El Nino's and La Ninas occur there's a larger ocean influence. It's called the Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO). It occurs in 30ish year trends. They line up well with the upward, and downward 30ish year trends we see in global temperature. CO2 rise does not. It especially does not line up with the leveling then lowering of temperatures we're currently seeing in the first decade of the 21 century.

When the PDO is positive (warming influence) you'll see more, and stronger El Ninos. Shorter and weaker La Ninas. When the PDO is negative you'll see more and stronger La Ninas, shorter and weaker El Ninos. Currently we've begun a negative PDO.

Here's something interesting, I think, that's rarely mentioned. If the 30 year trends of the PDO remain true to form those 30 year trends of the 21st century will be opposite what we saw in the 20th in that there will be 2 downward trends in global temperatures, and one up, rather than the 2 up and 1 down we saw in the 20th.

Indeed.

[ShepherdsDog]

$1:

You tell me, you're the Expert.

It's Sandorski's admission that he didn't know what El Nino and la Nina were two completely seperate weather phenomena that existed loooong before the Global Warming Goblin.

[PublicAnimalNo9]

Everything natural about this world of ours is cyclical. Day/Night, Life/Death, High tide/Low tide, eat/shit. It's all self-repeating and self-perpetuating.

[sandorski]

ShepherdsDog ShepherdsDog:

$1:

You tell me, you're the Expert.

It's Sandorski's admission that he didn't know what El Nino and la Nina were two completely seperate weather phenomena that existed loooong before the Global Warming Goblin.

I'm well aware of what they are and that they even are Natural. However, since El Nino is a Warming Ocean phenomena, it is clearly going to be affected by GW.

[TattoodGirl]

I dont really care unless I get + 20 degrees all year long....It will change my plans of escaping this cold frigid country next year.

Oh will it fuck up the Olympics?...cuz if it does I for one will be surfing with the biggest grin on my face

[Brenda]

sandorski sandorski:

ShepherdsDog ShepherdsDog:

$1:

You tell me, you're the Expert.

It's Sandorski's admission that he didn't know what El Nino and la Nina were two completely seperate weather phenomena that existed loooong before the Global Warming Goblin.

I'm well aware of what they are and that they even are Natural. However, since El Nino is a Warming Ocean phenomena, it is clearly going to be affected by GW.

And La Nina is the opposite and a cooling ocean phenomena. Still, it doesn't mean it is manmade, so NATURE IS JUST TAKING ITS COURSE.


(sorry I had to yell so early in the morning...)

[gigs]

sandorski sandorski:

I'm well aware of what they are and that they even are Natural. However, since El Nino is a Warming Ocean phenomena, it is clearly going to be affected by GW.

Really?

So what happened to the last one if it was so weak compared to 10 years ago, did GW take a vacation during 06 and 07 ?

"The last El Niño was in 2006-07 and, at its peak, sea surface temperatures averaged about 0.9 degrees above normal. But this is a stage which has already been reached by this one. "

[Hyack]

$1:

So what happened to the last one if it was so weak compared to 10 years ago, did GW take a vacation during 06 and 07 ?

This has got to be one of the most ridiculous statements I've ever read on this site. Is every hurricane, tornado, cyclone etc. the same? By your logic, no matter what, every El Nino should be the same??......

[PublicAnimalNo9]

oh shit, do I ever feel stupid. I always thot El Nino and La Nina were Spanish operas

[N_Fiddledog]

Hyack Hyack:

$1:

So what happened to the last one if it was so weak compared to 10 years ago, did GW take a vacation during 06 and 07 ?

This has got to be one of the most ridiculous statements I've ever read on this site. Is every hurricane, tornado, cyclone etc. the same? By your logic, no matter what, every El Nino should be the same??......

It's not ridiculous at all. In order to insure the kinds of disasters forecast from man made global warming were hearing about you need, specifically, what you find difficult to accept. A static climate.

If natural forces can over-ride the claimed man made one, then anthropogenic forces are not the main driver of climate, for that period at least. It therefore becomes legitimate to ask how can you be so sure the ice cap is going to melt, and sea levels are going to flood the coast by 2100. This will be a period we can specifically expect 60 years of cooling, and only 30 years of warming by natural forces (PDO).

Sandorski tells us AGW affects El Nino. There's no proof of that, and it's not a consensus statement. In examining it though it's legitimate to say "OK, why then was the last La Nina cooling so powerful?" This was a period where CO2 was steadily rising to a level larger than anything since direct measurements (not proxy) have been possible. If CO2 is the main driver of climate, where was it?

[ASLplease]

gigs gigs:

This could mean bad news for the Vancouver Olympics. However if you live on the eastern slopes of the Rockies and don't ski you could be rejoicing! I remember in 97 and 98 there was no winter weather until New Years Day in S Alberta.

what do you mean? I was at an ice fishing derby both of those years and it was -42 and -54 ( first weekend of every year)

[PublicAnimalNo9]

There are multiple natural reasons for climate changes. Vulcanism and believe it or not, plate techtonics play a large part. Volcanic effects are obvious and don't really need to be rehashed. But plate techtonics release tons of different gases into the atmosphere. A global increase or decrease of either, or both, of these activities will affect weather or "global warming/cooling".
While I do agree that we should be more environmentally responsible, scare tactics such as "global warming" are not the best vehicle to achieve that goal.

[sandorski]

Brenda Brenda:

sandorski sandorski:

ShepherdsDog ShepherdsDog:

It's Sandorski's admission that he didn't know what El Nino and la Nina were two completely seperate weather phenomena that existed loooong before the Global Warming Goblin.

I'm well aware of what they are and that they even are Natural. However, since El Nino is a Warming Ocean phenomena, it is clearly going to be affected by GW.

And La Nina is the opposite and a cooling ocean phenomena. Still, it doesn't mean it is manmade, so NATURE IS JUST TAKING ITS COURSE.


(sorry I had to yell so early in the morning...)

Sigh, it is not Brenda. Natural processes are being impacted by GW, it is inevitable and the consequences will be costly.