That's one helluva old hoax!

[Tom Petty]

"Time has proven that even 22 years ago climate scientists understood the dynamics behind global warming well enough to accurately predict warming, says an analysis that compares predictions in 1990 with 20 years of temperature records.
After an adjustment to account for natural fluctuations, the predictions and the observed increases matched up, the current research found."

http://news.yahoo.com/20-old-report-successfully-predicted-warming-scientists-200858337.html

 

[Norrin Radd]

Well . . .yeah.

CFCs and all that.

 

[Tom Petty]

i blame long links.

 

[dooley_womack1]

I blame soccer.

 

[Tom Petty]

touche.

 

[Tom Petty]

thank god.

 

[YankeeFan]

"Time has proven that even 22 years ago climate scientists understood the dynamics behind global warming well enough to accurately predict warming, says an analysis that compares predictions in 1990 with 20 years of temperature records.
After an adjustment to account for natural fluctuations, the predictions and the observed increases matched up, the current research found."

http://news.yahoo.com/20-old-report-successfully-predicted-warming-scientists-200858337.html

Did you read the whole article? It's hysterical.

The results didn't actually match up, so they skewed them! Where's Nate Silver to call "bull ****" when we need him:

The 1990 prediction did require an adjustment, since it did not take into account natural variability — which includes the chaotic nature of weather as well as longer-term natural patterns, such as the El Niño/La Niña cycle.

When Frame and Stone took natural variability into account, they found that the observed warming was consistent with the IPCC's best estimate for warming.

In percentage terms, a 0.63 degrees F increase isn't really that close to a 1 degree F increase.

10 years is also an incredibly short period to look at.

Then there's the weather stations these studies rely on. They're not owned, managed, or maintained by the the people running the study. The study relies on self reporting.

And, besides the fact that there's no "control" to compare the results to -- what would be the planets temperature if human existence ended in 1990 -- there are all kinds of flaws with the stations themselves:

As the country has evolved, building urban metropolises and airports and pouring parking lots, the weather stations haven’t moved, Watts said -- and poorly sited stations are spoiling the data.

...

That problem of poorly sited stations thanks to “encroaching urbanity” -- locations near asphalt, air conditioning and airports -- is well established. A sensor in Marysville, Calif., sits in a parking lot at a fire station next to an air conditioner exhaust and a cell tower. One in Redding, Calif., is housed in a box that also contains a halogen light bulb, which could emit warmth directly onto the gauge.

Watts cherry-picked the well-sited stations and reanalyzed their data; his results show the planet warming at just 0.155 degrees Celsius per decade, rather than the 0.309 C per decade cited by the governm

http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2012/07/30/weather-station-temp-claims-are-overheated-report-claims/#ixzz2EfJPszxw

The temperature data from the Chinese weather stations measured the warming there over the past half century and appeared in a 1990 paper in the prestigious journal Nature, which was cited by the IPCC's latest report in 2007.

Climate change sceptics asked the UEA, via FOI requests, for location data for the 84 weather stations in eastern China, half of which were urban and half rural.

The history of where the weather stations were sited was crucial to Jones and Wang's 1990 study, as it concluded the rising temperatures recorded in China were the result of global climate changes rather the warming effects of expanding cities.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/feb/01/leaked-emails-climate-jones-chinese

 

[Tom Petty]

fox news and the guardian. quality work, YF. quality work.

 

[Lieslntx]

So tonight's game means nothing? If I don't die on the 21st, it doesn't matter? Because the world is warming so fast that I will burn to a crisp three days later?

 

[Tom Petty]

naw. read the title. it's a hoax. just like evolution.

 

[YankeeFan]

fox news and the guardian. quality work, YF. quality work.

Do you deny what the articles claim?

There are problems with the weather stations. That's a fact.

 

[Tom Petty]

fox news and the guardian. quality work, YF. quality work.

Do you deny what the articles claim?

There are problems with the weather stations. That's a fact.

dunno, dude. i don't read or listen to **** that comes from fox, a proven lying ****ing "news" outlet.

 

[Lieslntx]

naw. read the title. it's a hoax. just like evolution.

I didn't think the blue font was necessary for you, TP.

 

[Tom Petty]

naw. read the title. it's a hoax. just like evolution.

I didn't think the blue font was necessary for you, TP.

ha.

 

[wicked]

Where's Nate Silver to call "bull ****" when we need him:

The same Nate Silver who a month ago you were saying was full of ****?

Yeah, that Nate Silver.

 

[DanOregon]

Even if you think humans contributed to global warming, if you think global warming is a problem and humans can do something about it - why would you oppose it?

I mean this fiscal cliff thing is all about our grandkids right? and making sure we don't saddle them with our debt - yet global warming is okay?