“Sometimes, we hear that global warming causes cooling. In this case, global warming causes global averageness. In all three cases, it is bad news.”
– Luboš Motl in
UAH global temperature anomaly – hitting the slopes
“Sometimes, we hear that global warming causes cooling. In this case, global warming causes global averageness. In all three cases, it is bad news.”
– Luboš Motl in
UAH global temperature anomaly – hitting the slopes
There’s no winning then. Cooling, warming, averageness – it all needs regulation by government. Just pay lots of fricken taxes and accept government domination of every inch of your life.
Climate is not weather.
Seriously if global surface temperatures stayed flat for the next 10 years, the warmists would be claiming (1) it’s consistent with their models; and (2) it’s warming far faster than expected.
brazil84 (13:05:16) :
“Seriously if global surface temperatures stayed flat for the next 10 years, the warmists would be claiming (1) it’s consistent with their models; and (2) it’s warming far faster than expected.”
Wait a minute…that’s what we hear people claiming now! Oh, I see what you did there…
brazil84 (13:05:16) :
The mantra if it stays flat is that the temperature is one of the warmest in the last x years and to ignore the fact that the temps aren’t going up.
I always though Luboš was way above averageness in his understanding of how climate stuff works.
tallbloke (12:46:55) :
Climate is not weather.
Neither is AGW, ‘Climate Change’, or whatever color of FUD is sloshed on it.
Weather, however, exists, and it will continue to be with us and to partake in the process of Climate instances.
Weather is the child of the current parent process known as Cimate.
Without children, the class is useless.
Now, for those who insist upon ignoring the weather, you get an F for the course of Climate.
The current models are sterile forms of Climate.
They produce no offspring (Weather).
Who are you going to believe, the model or what’s going on outside?
When I read the article, I thought the statement was a cracker!
Global averageness – a new midpoint for unstoppable global climate control.
You know Hadcrut could be exhibiting a new record soon? So your argument of ‘global warming ending in 1998’ will lose a little oomph.
So your argument of ‘global warming ending in 1998′ will lose a little oomph.
Not outside my window. How’s it working for you?
Lubos’ string theory math makes my head hurt.
But I like him anyway. 😉
jwr: “Lubos’ string theory math makes my head hurt.”
His math is a little quarky.
Awesome quote, Lubos. A bit too long for a t-shirt, though.
And sorry for the lack of hat in your final s, I don’t know how to make those funny accents.
tallbloke (12:46:55) :
“Climate is not weather”.
So if we ended one, the other wouldn’t be impacted?
Show us your answer. we want tyo see the work on paper.
Š = alt 0138
Nice chart of alt characters @:
http://www.tedmontgomery.com/tutorial/altchrc.html
henrychance (17:31:06) :
“tallbloke (12:46:55) :
“Climate is not weather”.
So if we ended one, the other wouldn’t be impacted?
Show us your answer. we want tyo see the work on paper.”
In tallbloke’s defense (not that he needs it); “The straightest distance between two points is a short line.”
Prove either of us wrong.
I believe in global flatness.
Gavin dear? Shall we go for a picnic on Sunday?…
You know? I mostly like you American dudes? But I hate how you call ‘maths’ math!
Color and harbor get me going a little bit too…
But, on reflection, you are mostly pretty good guys.
Keep up the good work!
Temperature up. Bad. Temperature down. Bad. Temperature steady. Bad. I give up!
I can see the headlines:
“Global temperatures are dangerously average”
“Scientists say global temperatures are more average than previously feared.”
“If this trend continues by 2030 temperatures will be average”
“Temperatures are the most average now since records began”
“Scientists go to the Arctic to prove that temperatures are average”
A sad story of what the cold can do but its blamed on climate change, the BBC is taking the snip, how dare they imply we should be spending our money on cutting CO2 by bringing AGW into the article when we could spend the money actually helping these people.
“Almost 250 children under the age of five have died in a wave of intensely cold weather in Peru.
Children die from pneumonia and other respiratory infections every year during the winter months particularly in Peru’s southern Andes.
But this year freezing temperatures arrived almost three months earlier than usual.
Experts blame climate change for the early arrival of intense cold which began in March. ”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8146995.stm
Everybody in the UK this is your money they are spending to write these articles, is there anything you can do?
Tom in Texas
I couldn’t get your html for the page of alternative characters to work.
I’ve now realized what “consistent with the models” actually means.
The climate models’ range is so wide, allowing for cooling, warming, the same, spikes, dips, inversions, that whatever the weather, it’s going to be consistent with the models.
Glorified playstations.
“Averageness” just means we are halfway between catastrophic warming that proves AGW and valid, and natural variable cooling due to a highly sensitive climate who’s rhythms can couple and decouple flinging it unexpectedly into new states, which show that warming will be even more serious than previously thought to be due to AGW. Sheesh, don’t you people understand anything?!
Jimmy Haigh (20:54:16) :
If it makes you feel any better, Americans use math as a abbreviation, without the period, that stands for mathematics.
Richard Heg (23:53:34) :
“Michael Mann runs latest proxies through model and finds … wait for it … a cue stick chart! “
The whole Global warming thing is probably not being caused by greenhouse gasses at all. Nasa satelites monitoring the Sun have discovered for a minimum of the last 30 years the sun has been increasing in temperature. They were also able to extrapolate to over a hundred years now and prove that it has been getting warmer for over a hundred years. The whole Al Gore thing is absolute nonsense.
Don’t confuse me with facts I’m saving the world, Global temperatures are declining but politicians keep speaking of warming
Temperatures are normal, it’s the Politics that are Wrong
By Dr. Tim Ball Monday, July 13, 2009
http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/12865
Don’t confuse me with facts I’m saving the world
But nothing stops Obama as his comments in Italy show. His purpose parallels a wonderful comment about exploiting environmental misinformation for social engineering toward more government control. Christine Stewart, Canada’s former Minister of the Environment said in 1998, “No matter if the science is all phony, there are collateral environmental benefits….Climate change [provides] the greatest chance to bring about justice and equality in the world.” It also provides a massive source of revenue.
H.R.
“In tallbloke’s defense (not that he needs it); “The straightest distance between two points is a short line.””
So, if you are traveling from, say, Sacramento, California, to Reno, Nevada, you will take the straight lie as it is shortest?
What kind of drilling/mining machines or explosives will you be using for that???
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
kuhnkat (08:15:27) :
I’ve got to agree that the straight lie will get you to where you want to go faster than any other method of getting to the answer.
Jim (06:44:03) :
Although math is an abbreviation of mathematics, it does seem more reasonable to use the plural maths to represent the plural mathematics – no matter how truly strange and unnecessary it seems to do so. As to using flavour, colour, etc. I put my foot down!
As to the quote of the week, your continued use of logic (and humour) to dislodge faith in my religion will not be countenanced! My lord Algore or one of his apostles will strike you down for this blasphemy!!
Global Warming Debate – Philip Stott
Lucy Skywalker (00:34:29) :
Lucy, I just clicked on my above “alt char chart” link and it worked fine for me.
alt 248 = °
alt 247 = ≈
kuhnkat (08:15:27) :
H.R.
“In tallbloke’s defense (not that he needs it); “The straightest distance between two points is a short line.””
So, if you are traveling from, say, Sacramento, California, to Reno, Nevada, you will take the straight lie as it is shortest?
What kind of drilling/mining machines or explosives will you be using for that???
Everyone knows the shortest distance between two pints is along a straight bar. You might not take the shortest or straightest way home after repeating the experiment several times however. Fortunately, being a heretic denialist flat-earther, I don’t need explosives or drills to be able to go straight to bed afterwards.
Though they might come in handy for waking up the government.
Was Guy Fawkes a flat earther? Hmmmm.
Ed Scott
Thanks for that link. What a speech!
Here’s my quote of the week, which sums up the night battle between the sides in the climate debate quite well:
“the only approach which does not inhibit progress (using whichever definition one sees fit) is “anything goes”: “‘anything goes’ is not a ‘principle’ I hold… but the terrified exclamation of a rationalist who takes a closer look at history.”
(Paul Feyerabend, 1975).
@kuhnkat (08:15:27) :
“H.R.
“In tallbloke’s defense (not that he needs it); “The straightest distance between two points is a short line.””
So, if you are traveling from, say, Sacramento, California, to Reno, Nevada, you will take the straight lie as it is shortest?
What kind of drilling/mining machines or explosives will you be using for that???
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Hey! No one is claiming it’s the easiest way ;o)
P.S. I think tallbloke, in his own defense, had a pint there.
Ed Scott (08:56:20) :
Global Warming Debate – Philip Stott
I bumped into Prof. Stott on a street in London near Russell Square a few months ago – I told him that I thought he was a very fine chap. I think he thiught I was a nutter!
Craig Moore (16:34:39) :
jwr: “Lubos’ string theory math makes my head hurt.”
His math is a little quarky.
I think it exhibits strangeness and charm at the same time. (Depending which end of the probability cone you look down).