Climate change humor and irony

[skierinvermont]

Dude...Real Climate is about as far from an unbiased source as you are going to find. Gavin Schmidt is a joke. I speak from personal experience as someone who used to lurk/post on Real Climate a lot.

And how you define "statistically significant" is subjective. The original hockey stick graph was obviously too flat and therefore made the recent warming look more extreme. There is no denying this.

Again: face the facts. Almost every AGW scientist who has released a study or made a prediction has been too extreme or too warm. Logically, what does that tell you?

Well if you read it he makes some good points and it's pretty clear that M&Ms analysis was flawed. The reason the original hockey stick was so flat was because that's what the data showed, not because of the methodology. And that's why peer-reviewed studies have consistently vindicated the MBH98 analysis. It didn't have as much data to work with as recent studies, and thus there was a large degree of uncertainty in the MBH98 analysis which was accurately represented in the graph.. that is what people fail to understand. The idea that MBH98 says global temperatures stayed flat for 1000 years is totally incorrect. Every reconstruction since then has fallen within its confidence interval, including Moberg et al. 2005 which has the most pronounced LIA and MWP I've seen.

Not every AGW prediction has been too extreme. Arctic sea ice is decreasing faster than IPCC predicted it would. Greenland ice mass loss has been faster than predicted.

[BethesdaWX]

Even WUWT is more unbiased than Realclimate . Realclimate doesn't allow anyone but warmists to guest post, WUWT has both warmists & skeptics posting.

Warmists could have taken over the blog actually, but there aren't enough of them anymore. The world is growing smarter, and the results are showing in the polls.

And yes, global temps did not stay flat for 1000 years.

[tacoman25]

Well if you read it he makes some good points and it's pretty clear that M&Ms analysis was flawed. The reason the original hockey stick was so flat was because that's what the data showed, not because of the methodology. And that's why peer-reviewed studies have consistently vindicated the MBH98 analysis. It didn't have as much data to work with as recent studies, and thus there was a large degree of uncertainty in the MBH98 analysis which was accurately represented in the graph.. that is what people fail to understand. The idea that MBH98 says global temperatures stayed flat for 1000 years is totally incorrect. Every reconstruction since then has fallen within its confidence interval, including Moberg et al. 2005 which has the most pronounced LIA and MWP I've seen.

Not every AGW prediction has been too extreme. Arctic sea ice is decreasing faster than IPCC predicted it would. Greenland ice mass loss has been faster than predicted.

1. I think a major problem is that the original hockey stick graph seem to be distributed without a disclaimer regarding the large uncertainty/confidence intervals. Because updated graphs certainly look different than the original.

2. Good point about Arctic sea ice and Greenland...however, these are regional changes in places that we know have a large degree of variability. So attributing those changes mainly to AGW is pretty shaky.

[skierinvermont]

1. I think a major problem is that the original hockey stick graph seem to be distributed without a disclaimer regarding the large uncertainty/confidence intervals. Because updated graphs certainly look different than the original.

2. Good point about Arctic sea ice and Greenland...however, these are regional changes in places that we know have a large degree of variability. So attributing those changes mainly to AGW is pretty shaky.

They definitely made it into the silver bullet which it was not.

[Hambone]

I'm sure the paper I quoted is plenty biased as are most publications in a controversial field like global warming....I think the general point stands, however, that there has been an attempt to even out historic temperature variation in order to exaggerate the human influence. This is in the same vein as the Climategate e-mails which talk about high temperatures and SSTs in the 1940s as a "problem," as if the Earth were doing something inconvenient by warming on its own. It definitely sounds to me as if there's a bias towards AGW, which makes sense given that many careers and millions of dollars have been staked on the rapid warming argument.

Bingo!

[JBG]

Forwarded to me by a buddy in AFWA. I'm a global warming proponent but these things are just too funny and ironic!

The temperature yesterday morning (December 7) in Cancun dropped to 51F, breaking the record low of 64 for the date set in 2000. It was also the coldest December morning ever in Cancun history (old record 52F). As you probably know, the United Nations International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is meeting in Cancun this week. Recall last year, the IPCC Copenhagen meeting was hit with a blizzard and frigid temperatures. The IPCC moved their meeting to Cancun to avoid another embarrassment and feel the global warmth (NOT).

Meanwhile in England, the UKMO's Dr. Vicky Pope was trapped at Gatwick airport by heavy snow on her way to a press event where she would announce that 2010 may be the warmest year on record. During the last week of November and first week in December the temperatures at the longest temperature record station anywhere on the globe (Central England Temperatures - CET) was the coldest for any two week period during the entire record going back to 1659 (the Little Ice Age).

I understand the science of AGW pretty well I think, but this is pretty funny and ironic.

Add to that the fact that Obama returned early from last year's confab in Copenhagen to beat the December 19, 2009 KU storm.

[JBG]

1. I think a major problem is that the original hockey stick graph seem to be distributed without a disclaimer regarding the large uncertainty/confidence intervals. Because updated graphs certainly look different than the original.

2. Good point about Arctic sea ice and Greenland...however, these are regional changes in places that we know have a large degree of variability. So attributing those changes mainly to AGW is pretty shaky.

The pace of climate change has often been described as a hockey stick (link) with dire consequences. Here's another such circumstance. According to figures from Weather Underground for

White Plains, New York (link) , which also has daylight statistics, we are losing daylight at an accelerating pitch. For example, on June 21, 2010 we had the length the day was 15 hours 8 minutes. Ten (10) days later, on July 1, 2010 we had 14 hours, 56 minutes, a drop of 12 minutes. Not too serious. Alarmingly, between October 10, 2010 and October 20, 2010 we dropped from 11 hours 21 minutes to 10 hours 54 minutes, a loss of 27 minutes.

This means to me that we are on an accelerating course to 100% darkness which, if unchecked, will clog New York Harbor with ice. Musk ox will shortly be pawing the ground in Central Park.

We need drastic action to avoid oblivion!!!

[aslkahuna]

The pace of climate change has often been described as a hockey stick (link) with dire consequences. Here's another such circumstance. According to figures from Weather Underground for

White Plains, New York (link) , which also has daylight statistics, we are losing daylight at an accelerating pitch. For example, on June 21, 2010 we had the length the day was 15 hours 8 minutes. Ten (10) days later, on July 1, 2010 we had 14 hours, 56 minutes, a drop of 12 minutes. Not too serious. Alarmingly, between October 10, 2010 and October 20, 2010 we dropped from 11 hours 21 minutes to 10 hours 54 minutes, a loss of 27 minutes.

This means to me that we are on an accelerating course to 100% darkness which, if unchecked, will clog New York Harbor with ice. Musk ox will shortly be pawing the ground in Central Park.

We need drastic action to avoid oblivion!!!

You are repeating yourself-you had a thread on this earlier. I still maintain that we should wait until after December 21st before we panic.

Steve

[JBG]

Forwarded to me by a buddy in AFWA. I'm a global warming proponent but these things are just too funny and ironic!

The temperature yesterday morning (December 7) in Cancun dropped to 51F, breaking the record low of 64 for the date set in 2000. It was also the coldest December morning ever in Cancun history (old record 52F). As you probably know, the United Nations International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is meeting in Cancun this week. Recall last year, the IPCC Copenhagen meeting was hit with a blizzard and frigid temperatures. The IPCC moved their meeting to Cancun to avoid another embarrassment and feel the global warmth (NOT).

Meanwhile in England, the UKMO's Dr. Vicky Pope was trapped at Gatwick airport by heavy snow on her way to a press event where she would announce that 2010 may be the warmest year on record. During the last week of November and first week in December the temperatures at the longest temperature record station anywhere on the globe (Central England Temperatures - CET) was the coldest for any two week period during the entire record going back to 1659 (the Little Ice Age).

Add to that from last year's Copenhagen confab the snow that interfered with the conference, and the fact that Obama had to return to Washington DC early to beat out a coming 23" snowstorm.

[JBG]

You are repeating yourself-you had a thread on this earlier. I still maintain that we should wait until after December 21st before we panic.

Steve

But why?

The conferees at Cancun, Bali, Copenhagen were taking serious action. We need to panic fast.

[JBG]

Add to that the fact that Obama returned early from last year's confab in Copenhagen to beat the December 19, 2009 KU storm.

The pace of climate change has often been described as a hockey stick (link) with dire consequences. Here's another such circumstance. According to figures from Weather Underground for

White Plains, New York (link) , which also has daylight statistics, we are losing daylight at an accelerating pitch. For example, on June 21, 2010 we had the length the day was 15 hours 8 minutes. Ten (10) days later, on July 1, 2010 we had 14 hours, 56 minutes, a drop of 12 minutes. Not too serious. Alarmingly, between October 10, 2010 and October 20, 2010 we dropped from 11 hours 21 minutes to 10 hours 54 minutes, a loss of 27 minutes.

This means to me that we are on an accelerating course to 100% darkness which, if unchecked, will clog New York Harbor with ice. Musk ox will shortly be pawing the ground in Central Park.

We need drastic action to avoid oblivion!!!

I didn't know that the earlier posts were moved before posting my last reply.

[Snow_Miser]

[Mencken_Fan]

"Barbra Streisand told Diane Sawyer that we're in a global warming crisis, and we can expect more and more intense storms, droughts and dust bowls. But before they act, weather experts say they're still waiting to hear from Celine Dion."

ROFLMAO!

This is a good thread!

Thank you

[beneficii]

Forwarded to me by a buddy in AFWA. I'm a global warming proponent but these things are just too funny and ironic!

The temperature yesterday morning (December 7) in Cancun dropped to 51F, breaking the record low of 64 for the date set in 2000. It was also the coldest December morning ever in Cancun history (old record 52F). As you probably know, the United Nations International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is meeting in Cancun this week. Recall last year, the IPCC Copenhagen meeting was hit with a blizzard and frigid temperatures. The IPCC moved their meeting to Cancun to avoid another embarrassment and feel the global warmth (NOT).

Meanwhile in England, the UKMO's Dr. Vicky Pope was trapped at Gatwick airport by heavy snow on her way to a press event where she would announce that 2010 may be the warmest year on record. During the last week of November and first week in December the temperatures at the longest temperature record station anywhere on the globe (Central England Temperatures - CET) was the coldest for any two week period during the entire record going back to 1659 (the Little Ice Age).

And just as I was talking about AGW (a proponent), Memphis is setting up for some possibly heavy snowfall.

[nzucker]

[/font][/font]

Within 10 years we will all be laughing at your ridiculous prediction of arctic sea ice and global temperature not warming for the next 20 years.

So now we verify a 20-year forecast in ten years? You're such a great meteorological thinker and deserve to work alongside NASA's best. Only Skier LOL....

Stop worrying so much about AGW..there are hundreds of thousands of people dying of AIDS in Africa, an educational crisis right here in America, thousands without electricity or safe water in Central America...and yet you're freaking out about how much snow or how many 'canes we'll have in 2100. Priorities, priorities.

[Mencken_Fan]

I thought this thread was supposed to be about the HUMOR and irony seen in the subject and not the usual back and forth attacks.

Steve

Well....it started off good....then poof...

The constant cuckooing of the same points, by the same people; who all know they're 100% right.....

Sigh.