Nick,
Well ambition I can understand. There is a lot on the plate. Best wishes for the New Year. I shall stay tuned.
mw
Comment on Busting (or not) the mid-20th century global-warming hiatus by mwgrant
↧
↧
Comment on Year in review – top science stories by bobdroege
We should wait til 2016 to make any climate or weather lists, as this last week of weather is unusual to say the least.
St Louis will experience the 2nd worst flood of record.
Usually don’t get these kinds of deluges in December.
↧
Comment on What is there a 97% consensus about? by Weekly Climate and Energy News Roundup #211 | Watts Up With That?
↧
Comment on Busting (or not) the mid-20th century global-warming hiatus by Weekly Climate and Energy News Roundup #211 | Watts Up With That?
↧
Comment on NOAA fails walrus science by Weekly Climate and Energy News Roundup #211 | Watts Up With That?
↧
↧
Comment on Busting (or not) the mid-20th century global-warming hiatus by Steven Mosher
“It was YOU who mentioned 1880 on this sub thread. The idea that we had accurate global SST’s for 20 years before Dickens died warrants just one response. Bah! Humbug!”
Tony.
The SST measures are just as good if not better than CET.
↧
Comment on Busting (or not) the mid-20th century global-warming hiatus by Nick Stokes
mw,
“Best wishes for the New Year.”
Thanks, and to you. I shall make a resolution.
↧
Comment on Year in review – top science stories by Derin Cag (@DerinCag)
Please contact me as soon as you can, I have an important business proposal to make regarding your blog.
↧
Comment on Year in review – top science stories by Peter Lang
Derin Cag,
I am the agent. Send me a $ million to start negotiations.
↧
↧
Comment on Year in review – top science stories by Mike Flynn
Derin Cag,
Peter Lang is an impostor. Any important business proposals need to go through me. How much are you offering? Please send me your bank account details and password to demonstrate good faith.
I remain, sir,
Your humble and obedient servant,
Mike Flynn.
↧
Comment on Week in review – science and technology edition by schitzree
Judith: I love it! ^¿^
JIM D: If that was you truly tying to use logic and not just trolling, it would explain much.
↧
Comment on Busting (or not) the mid-20th century global-warming hiatus by RichardLH
“The SST measures are just as good if not better than CET.”
Based on what data? For the whole globe? Seriously?
↧
Comment on Busting (or not) the mid-20th century global-warming hiatus by RichardLH
““Best wishes for the New Year.”
Thanks, and to you. I shall make a resolution.”
And a good New Year to you also.
I too will make a resolution. :-)
↧
↧
Comment on Week in review – science and technology edition by Mike Flynn
Jim D,
You wrote –
“Dyson is against climate fanatics.
Climate fanatics are against deforestation.
Dyson is against deforestation.
What does that make Dyson?”
Answer – sensible. I’m surprised you couldn’t work out the answer to such a simple question. Do you often face such difficulty?
Cheers.
↧
Comment on Year in review – top science stories by ...and Then There's Physics
<blockquote>
Climate scientists have bet big on a catastrophic outcome arriving soon.
</blockquote>
Rubbish. Climate scientists are studying our climate; past, present, future and presenting possible outcomes that depend on what pathways we might follow in the future. Maybe one stumbling block to breaking the jam is those who continually <a href="http://judithcurry.com/2015/12/13/a-closer-look-at-scenario-rcp8-5/#comment-751536" rel="nofollow">misrepresent others</a>?
↧
Comment on Year in review – top science stories by schitzree
And here I thought “That’s All Right Mama” by Arthur Crudup was the oldest Rock.
↧
Comment on Year in review – top science stories by Stephen Segrest
Planning Engineer — Do you agree with Mr. Lang’s statement on what you have written? A simple yes or no would be OK with me.
↧
↧
Comment on Year in review – top science stories by David Wojick
Given the demographics of the opposing beliefs, I do not see it ending. Rather it may become a permanent political stalemate, like gun control. Environmental impact assessment (which this issue is) is so nebulous scientifically that it may never be resolved.
Fracking may well take over as the new green battleground. See
http://www.psr.org/resources/fracking-compendium.html?referrer=http://www.psr.org/?referrer=https://www.google.com/
in the style of the IPCC. Anti-fracking promotes renewables too.
↧
Comment on Year in review – top science stories by stevenreincarnated
I think the biggest climate science news story is the shifting of the consensus view towards some sort of recovery in the Arctic. The consensus has built a huge sandcastle up there. Hey, it looked good while it lasted.
I think the biggest climate political news is how the Paris agreement was treated. It reminds me of the times we have decided to just declare victory and go home.
↧
Comment on Year in review – top science stories by Mike Flynn
ATTP,
You wrote –
“Rubbish. Climate scientists are studying our climate; past, present, future and presenting possible outcomes that depend on what pathways we might follow in the future.”
You can’t even define climate, apart from saying it is the average of weather. To claim this is science is the operation of a weak mind. To claim that climate scientists study the future climate, as you do, is to venture into the realms of fantasy.
Study the future? Surely you jest! Even fortune tellers draw the line at promoting such fraudulent claims. Any reasonable, rational person knows it is impossible to study that which has not yet occurred.
But of course, Warmists are neither reasonable nor rational. Denying reality, they believe they can escry the future by adjusting past weather.
There’s physics, and then there’s Warmist fantasy – take your choice.
Cheers.
↧
