Comments on: Big Chill on Global Warming http://www.globalclimatescam.com/2009/10/big-chill-on-global-warming/ Exposing the truth about global warming hysteria Wed, 08 Feb 2012 05:24:10 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3 By: Ginny http://www.globalclimatescam.com/2009/10/big-chill-on-global-warming/comment-page-1/#comment-4697 Ginny Wed, 04 Nov 2009 18:03:27 +0000 http://www.globalclimatescam.com/?p=579#comment-4697 Just to correct the statement of no hurricanes hitting the US since Katrina, there have been a number of them. Katrina was in Sept. of '05. Since that time, 6 Hurricanes have hit the US. 2005 included Rita (Cat 3) and Wilma (Cat 3). Humberto (Cat 1) hit in Sept. 2007, Dolly (Cat 1) in July 2008, Gustav (Cat 3) in Sept. 2008, and Ike (Cat 2) in Sept 2008. I live in Southeast Texas, approx. 50 miles, give or take, North of Houston. Although a Cat 2 doesn't seem like much, you should try living through it. Even being this far from Houston, Ike hit Galveston as a Cat 2 and we had winds for about 8-10 hours. There was substatial damage done in this area alone. Galveston and a nearby peninsula were devastated. I'm not saying man caused this, I'm simply correcting the above statement. Some of these storms, not to mention Katrina, set records. In addition to these US hitting hurricanes, Dean and Felix, both in 2007, were Cat 5 hurricanes. Just to correct the statement of no hurricanes hitting the US since Katrina, there have been a number of them. Katrina was in Sept. of ’05. Since that time, 6 Hurricanes have hit the US. 2005 included Rita (Cat 3) and Wilma (Cat 3). Humberto (Cat 1) hit in Sept. 2007, Dolly (Cat 1) in July 2008, Gustav (Cat 3) in Sept. 2008, and Ike (Cat 2) in Sept 2008. I live in Southeast Texas, approx. 50 miles, give or take, North of Houston. Although a Cat 2 doesn’t seem like much, you should try living through it. Even being this far from Houston, Ike hit Galveston as a Cat 2 and we had winds for about 8-10 hours. There was substatial damage done in this area alone. Galveston and a nearby peninsula were devastated. I’m not saying man caused this, I’m simply correcting the above statement. Some of these storms, not to mention Katrina, set records. In addition to these US hitting hurricanes, Dean and Felix, both in 2007, were Cat 5 hurricanes.

]]> By: Rob N. Hood http://www.globalclimatescam.com/2009/10/big-chill-on-global-warming/comment-page-1/#comment-3993 Rob N. Hood Fri, 23 Oct 2009 21:56:00 +0000 http://www.globalclimatescam.com/?p=579#comment-3993 Ok, whatever. The fact that you have to add somthing to a fact that doesn't coincide with your beliefs to make it more platable for you was my point. You do it all the time. Anyone can, it's not hard to do. It just seems desperate, and hypocritical when you say I have "confirmation bias." I don't care what the "prediction" was. So the scientific prediction didn't come true 100%. When does that ever happen? Probably almost never would be my guess. Clutch onto your tidbits of reality, be my guest. Ok, whatever. The fact that you have to add somthing to a fact that doesn’t coincide with your beliefs to make it more platable for you was my point. You do it all the time. Anyone can, it’s not hard to do. It just seems desperate, and hypocritical when you say I have “confirmation bias.” I don’t care what the “prediction” was. So the scientific prediction didn’t come true 100%. When does that ever happen? Probably almost never would be my guess. Clutch onto your tidbits of reality, be my guest.

]]> By: Neil F. AGWD http://www.globalclimatescam.com/2009/10/big-chill-on-global-warming/comment-page-1/#comment-3737 Neil F. AGWD Wed, 21 Oct 2009 21:29:59 +0000 http://www.globalclimatescam.com/?p=579#comment-3737 No. That would be AGWG. I'm just an AGWD. No. That would be AGWG. I’m just an AGWD.

]]> By: Neil F. AGWD http://www.globalclimatescam.com/2009/10/big-chill-on-global-warming/comment-page-1/#comment-3733 Neil F. AGWD Wed, 21 Oct 2009 21:23:58 +0000 http://www.globalclimatescam.com/?p=579#comment-3733 Not a genius. Just right. You have the grace of a bird flying into a pane of glass Rob. "Confirmation bias refers to a type of selective thinking whereby one tends to notice and to look for what confirms one's beliefs, and to ignore, not look for, or undervalue the relevance of what contradicts one's beliefs." http://www.skepdic.com/confirmbias.html Let me point out how you are flawed in your reasoning: "Oh, wait, when you confirmed that the number of hurricanes has increased but then you have to add your own little extra bit to make you feel better about it… that the Intesnsity, hasn’t increased." You are the one who is not looking for, and undervaluing the fact that the intensity of hurricanes has not increased. As you may recal the prediction was for the frequency AND intensity of hurricanes would increase: http://www.pewclimate.org/hurricanes.cfm#freq "Several peer-reviewed studies show a clear global trend toward increased intensity of the strongest hurricanes over the past two or three decades. The strongest trends are in the North Atlantic Ocean and the Indian Ocean. According to the 2007 Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC-AR4), it is “more likely than not” (better than even odds) that there is a human contribution to the observed trend of hurricane intensification since the 1970s. In the future, “it is likely [better than 2 to 1 odds] that future tropical cyclones (typhoons and hurricanes) will become more intense, with larger peak wind speeds and more heavy precipitation associated with ongoing increases of tropical [sea surface temperatures]." That is to show that I'm not making it up. And me pointing out that this above prediction is wrong is not a confirmation bias. It's called looking at ALL the facts. In fact, to show that I do not have confirmation bias, I readily admit that the prediction of increased frequency was correct. Albeit that the REASON for the increase in frequency is not because of warming.... because there hasn't been any warming. But hey, even a stopped clock is right twice a day. Right? Not a genius. Just right. You have the grace of a bird flying into a pane of glass Rob.

“Confirmation bias refers to a type of selective thinking whereby one tends to notice and to look for what confirms one’s beliefs, and to ignore, not look for, or undervalue the relevance of what contradicts one’s beliefs.”
http://www.skepdic.com/confirmbias.html

Let me point out how you are flawed in your reasoning:
“Oh, wait, when you confirmed that the number of hurricanes has increased but then you have to add your own little extra bit to make you feel better about it… that the Intesnsity, hasn’t increased.”
You are the one who is not looking for, and undervaluing the fact that the intensity of hurricanes has not increased. As you may recal the prediction was for the frequency AND intensity of hurricanes would increase:

http://www.pewclimate.org/hurricanes.cfm#freq
“Several peer-reviewed studies show a clear global trend toward increased intensity of the strongest hurricanes over the past two or three decades. The strongest trends are in the North Atlantic Ocean and the Indian Ocean. According to the 2007 Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC-AR4), it is “more likely than not” (better than even odds) that there is a human contribution to the observed trend of hurricane intensification since the 1970s. In the future, “it is likely [better than 2 to 1 odds] that future tropical cyclones (typhoons and hurricanes) will become more intense, with larger peak wind speeds and more heavy precipitation associated with ongoing increases of tropical [sea surface temperatures].”

That is to show that I’m not making it up. And me pointing out that this above prediction is wrong is not a confirmation bias. It’s called looking at ALL the facts. In fact, to show that I do not have confirmation bias, I readily admit that the prediction of increased frequency was correct. Albeit that the REASON for the increase in frequency is not because of warming…. because there hasn’t been any warming. But hey, even a stopped clock is right twice a day. Right?

]]> By: Rob N. Hood http://www.globalclimatescam.com/2009/10/big-chill-on-global-warming/comment-page-1/#comment-3689 Rob N. Hood Wed, 21 Oct 2009 17:20:01 +0000 http://www.globalclimatescam.com/?p=579#comment-3689 No I can't, you win Neil. You are the AGW God. Some kind of genius. Oh, wait, when you confirmed that the number of hurricanes has increased but then you have to add your own little extra bit to make you feel better about it... that the Intesnsity, hasn't increased. Who has the confirmation bias Neil? Oh no, Neil, not you! No I can’t, you win Neil. You are the AGW God. Some kind of genius. Oh, wait, when you confirmed that the number of hurricanes has increased but then you have to add your own little extra bit to make you feel better about it… that the Intesnsity, hasn’t increased. Who has the confirmation bias Neil? Oh no, Neil, not you!

]]> By: Neil F. AGWD http://www.globalclimatescam.com/2009/10/big-chill-on-global-warming/comment-page-1/#comment-3652 Neil F. AGWD Wed, 21 Oct 2009 14:25:55 +0000 http://www.globalclimatescam.com/?p=579#comment-3652 "Show me where the planet is warming, and I will shut up. Back in 87′ they said 6.4 degrees celcius by the end of the next century. So you show me where the average global temp has risen .64 degrees C. in the last ten years and I’ll shut up. You posted a story about the frequency of hurricanes has risen. I posted one that gives more information as in the frequency is higher but the intensity of the storms have not gone up. I think you have blinders on Rob. You only see what you want to see. It’s called a confirmation bias. I do not have such an impedement. If you show me where the Earth has warmed, I will shut up." That's what I posted just a few comments ago. Don't you want shut me up Rob? What are you afraid of? Are you not up to the challenge? That's what I just did Rob, I challenged you to show me where the averge global temp has risen by .64 degrees C. You don't win by walking away from the game, you forfeit when you do that. But I already know what the answer is. You can't show me wher the temperature has risen because it hasn't. “Show me where the planet is warming, and I will shut up. Back in 87′ they said 6.4 degrees celcius by the end of the next century. So you show me where the average global temp has risen .64 degrees C. in the last ten years and I’ll shut up.
You posted a story about the frequency of hurricanes has risen. I posted one that gives more information as in the frequency is higher but the intensity of the storms have not gone up. I think you have blinders on Rob. You only see what you want to see. It’s called a confirmation bias. I do not have such an impedement. If you show me where the Earth has warmed, I will shut up.”

That’s what I posted just a few comments ago. Don’t you want shut me up Rob? What are you afraid of? Are you not up to the challenge? That’s what I just did Rob, I challenged you to show me where the averge global temp has risen by .64 degrees C. You don’t win by walking away from the game, you forfeit when you do that. But I already know what the answer is. You can’t show me wher the temperature has risen because it hasn’t.

]]> By: Rob N. Hood http://www.globalclimatescam.com/2009/10/big-chill-on-global-warming/comment-page-1/#comment-3644 Rob N. Hood Wed, 21 Oct 2009 13:47:34 +0000 http://www.globalclimatescam.com/?p=579#comment-3644 It's funny how thin-skinned you babies really are. Like you guyes are going to change any time soon. Ha ha. All I've ever done is follow the most rational and logical info. could that ever be wrong? Sure it could, and I admit that. But I'll put my money on that side every time verses the side of emotion which is what you guys do, every time. That's all. It’s funny how thin-skinned you babies really are. Like you guyes are going to change any time soon. Ha ha. All I’ve ever done is follow the most rational and logical info. could that ever be wrong? Sure it could, and I admit that. But I’ll put my money on that side every time verses the side of emotion which is what you guys do, every time. That’s all.

]]> By: Neil F. AGWD http://www.globalclimatescam.com/2009/10/big-chill-on-global-warming/comment-page-1/#comment-3574 Neil F. AGWD Wed, 21 Oct 2009 02:25:20 +0000 http://www.globalclimatescam.com/?p=579#comment-3574 Paul, Rob is Rob. He won't change. He's trying to educate us, because he is so superior to us stupid knuckle-draggin-scotch-breath-red-face-nazi-racist-biggot-homophobe-conservatives. Don't you get it? You should be honerd to be talked down to by Rob, he's sooooo open minded.........................NOT!!!! Paul, Rob is Rob. He won’t change. He’s trying to educate us, because he is so superior to us stupid knuckle-draggin-scotch-breath-red-face-nazi-racist-biggot-homophobe-conservatives. Don’t you get it? You should be honerd to be talked down to by Rob, he’s sooooo open minded…………………….NOT!!!!

]]> By: Paul Wenum http://www.globalclimatescam.com/2009/10/big-chill-on-global-warming/comment-page-1/#comment-3557 Paul Wenum Wed, 21 Oct 2009 01:14:08 +0000 http://www.globalclimatescam.com/?p=579#comment-3557 Robbie Boy is like a bad rash that will not go away. It is always left versus right. Robbie Boy get off your talking points from the DNC and speak for yourself. You annoy me. Robbie Boy is like a bad rash that will not go away. It is always left versus right. Robbie Boy get off your talking points from the DNC and speak for yourself. You annoy me.

]]> By: Neil F. AGWD http://www.globalclimatescam.com/2009/10/big-chill-on-global-warming/comment-page-1/#comment-3543 Neil F. AGWD Wed, 21 Oct 2009 00:22:08 +0000 http://www.globalclimatescam.com/?p=579#comment-3543 That's all fine and dandy Rob. But show me where the planet is warming, and I will shut up. Back in 87' they said 6.4 degrees celcius by the end of the next century. So you show me where the average global temp has risen .64 degrees C. in the last ten years and I'll shut up. You posted a story about the frequency of hurricanes has risen. I posted one that gives more information as in the frequency is higher but the intensity of the storms have not gone up. I think you have blinders on Rob. You only see what you want to see. It's called a confirmation bias. I do not have such an impedement. If you show me where the Earth has warmed, I will shut up. That’s all fine and dandy Rob. But show me where the planet is warming, and I will shut up. Back in 87′ they said 6.4 degrees celcius by the end of the next century. So you show me where the average global temp has risen .64 degrees C. in the last ten years and I’ll shut up.
You posted a story about the frequency of hurricanes has risen. I posted one that gives more information as in the frequency is higher but the intensity of the storms have not gone up. I think you have blinders on Rob. You only see what you want to see. It’s called a confirmation bias. I do not have such an impedement. If you show me where the Earth has warmed, I will shut up.

]]> By: Rob N. Hood http://www.globalclimatescam.com/2009/10/big-chill-on-global-warming/comment-page-1/#comment-3520 Rob N. Hood Tue, 20 Oct 2009 21:56:03 +0000 http://www.globalclimatescam.com/?p=579#comment-3520 While your point about the consensus has initial appeal it side-steps the issue as usual. The main reason is this: the scientists who started talking about this issue WERE IN THE MINORITY FOR A VERY LONG TIME, AND SINCE IT WAS A VERY DISTURBING TOPIC OTHERS ALSO STUDIED IT OVER THE YEARS, AND IT IS ALL OF THESE SCIENTISTS PUT TOGETHER NOW THAT MAKE UP THE MAJORITY. Just because they are the majoity means nothing except that they are in the majoity. And as far a modern science goes that is a pretty powerful thing. Scientists in the old days were always in the minority, and it was the powerful who tried to supprress them, same thing is happening here, that's all. Like they say the more things change they more they stay the same. While your point about the consensus has initial appeal it side-steps the issue as usual. The main reason is this: the scientists who started talking about this issue WERE IN THE MINORITY FOR A VERY LONG TIME, AND SINCE IT WAS A VERY DISTURBING TOPIC OTHERS ALSO STUDIED IT OVER THE YEARS, AND IT IS ALL OF THESE SCIENTISTS PUT TOGETHER NOW THAT MAKE UP THE MAJORITY. Just because they are the majoity means nothing except that they are in the majoity. And as far a modern science goes that is a pretty powerful thing. Scientists in the old days were always in the minority, and it was the powerful who tried to supprress them, same thing is happening here, that’s all. Like they say the more things change they more they stay the same.

]]> By: Chips http://www.globalclimatescam.com/2009/10/big-chill-on-global-warming/comment-page-1/#comment-3482 Chips Tue, 20 Oct 2009 18:43:06 +0000 http://www.globalclimatescam.com/?p=579#comment-3482 Oh hell. I was going to comment, but I lost my notes. Oh hell. I was going to comment, but I lost my notes.

]]> By: Neil F. AGWD http://www.globalclimatescam.com/2009/10/big-chill-on-global-warming/comment-page-1/#comment-3477 Neil F. AGWD Tue, 20 Oct 2009 18:27:15 +0000 http://www.globalclimatescam.com/?p=579#comment-3477 http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/09/090922112207.htm "This is a hot button in the argument for global warming,” said Lund. “Climatologists reporting to the U.S. Senate as recently as this summer testified to the exact opposite of what we find. Many researchers have maintained that warming waters of the Atlantic are increasing the strengths of these storms. We do not see evidence for this at all, however we do find that the number of storms has recently increased.” Rob, this is the rest of the story. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/09/090922112207.htm
“This is a hot button in the argument for global warming,” said Lund. “Climatologists reporting to the U.S. Senate as recently as this summer testified to the exact opposite of what we find. Many researchers have maintained that warming waters of the Atlantic are increasing the strengths of these storms. We do not see evidence for this at all, however we do find that the number of storms has recently increased.”
Rob, this is the rest of the story.

]]> By: Neil F. AGWD http://www.globalclimatescam.com/2009/10/big-chill-on-global-warming/comment-page-1/#comment-3475 Neil F. AGWD Tue, 20 Oct 2009 18:22:33 +0000 http://www.globalclimatescam.com/?p=579#comment-3475 "actually it were mostly the scientists that were CORRECT that were disregarded, imprisoned or executed." You mean like people who went against the CONSENSUS, Like Galilao? A majority of scientists around the world believed (sound familiar) we were the center of the universe, and everything revolved around the Earth. Wow Rob, that is a terrible argument to choose. “actually it were mostly the scientists that were CORRECT that were disregarded, imprisoned or executed.”
You mean like people who went against the CONSENSUS, Like Galilao? A majority of scientists around the world believed (sound familiar) we were the center of the universe, and everything revolved around the Earth. Wow Rob, that is a terrible argument to choose.

]]> By: Neil F. AGWD http://www.globalclimatescam.com/2009/10/big-chill-on-global-warming/comment-page-1/#comment-3474 Neil F. AGWD Tue, 20 Oct 2009 18:14:58 +0000 http://www.globalclimatescam.com/?p=579#comment-3474 I don't think that's funny Rob. In fact I think it's below the belt. If you put up your picture, I have enough class to not ridicule you on how you look. I think it's childish. I don’t think that’s funny Rob. In fact I think it’s below the belt. If you put up your picture, I have enough class to not ridicule you on how you look. I think it’s childish.

]]>