Quote from: walkstall on July 28, 2014, 09:05:14 AM
  So is what summer is all about.  What next 2 months or just one.   

So, it wasn't even the hottest? 

Quote from: Solar on July 28, 2014, 08:57:02 AM
Link to opinion?
USA Today rag is notorious for this kind of bull shit.

Now he's posting articles and saying the link is there, when it's not.  The only link in the article is to an article to how the US was the coolest since 2009 (a 2013 article).

Yep. We got us another troll.

Quote from: taxed on July 28, 2014, 09:28:58 AM
Now he's posting articles and saying the link is there, when it's not.  The only link in the article is to an article to how the US was the coolest since 2009 (a 2013 article).

Quote from: Solar on July 28, 2014, 12:41:27 PM

Oh dear, it's worse than I thought.  I re-read his post.  He says the link is the author.

The link is the author. USA Today employs an environmental guy and he writes submissions that get published. If you want the sources for the stats ask him, not me.

If you think the stats inaccurate, maybe so, do the research, i am not you servant.

If you don't like USA Today fine, I could care less what your reading preference is.

And frankly I don't really care about your opinion of climate change, it just doesn't matter. You see it is not a subject that I will ever master, and neither will you. We can only learn, collect more info, and read what experts write.

Or we can be fools and claim we "get it" cause we are really, really smart.

Quote from: drjim893 on July 28, 2014, 03:26:33 PM
The link is the author. USA Today employs an environmental guy and he writes submissions that get published. If you want the sources for the stats ask him, not me.

No.  Link to the data.  If you post idiocy, then you must defend it.  If you can't find or locate the data, just say so.

Quote
If you think the stats inaccurate, maybe so, do the research, i am not you servant.

The one rule of this forum is you provide evidence for your posts.  Just posting some author isn't facts or data.

Quote
If you don't like USA Today fine, I could care less what your reading preference is.

I could care less if you care less.  I don't care if Mars Today posts an article or opinion piece; it needs to be sourced so we can dissect and analyze it.

Quote
And frankly I don't really care about your opinion of climate change, it just doesn't matter. You see it is not a subject that I will ever master, and neither will you. We can only learn, collect more info, and read what experts write.

Or we can be fools and claim we "get it" cause we are really, really smart.

Is there a global warming crisis?

Quote from: taxed on July 28, 2014, 04:27:28 AM
Global warming is so out of control that it's getting cold!

Where's Sci Fi Fan when you need him?!!?!

http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2014/07/26/coolest-summer-on-record-in-the-us/

This is hilarious.

1. Why the fuck do your links always go to blogs, think tanks, news journals, or anything but a peer reviewed scientific publication? 
2. If you're going to appeal to a random internet blogger, at least appeal to one that bothers to cite his sources.
3. I love how he cherry picks "percentage of 90 degree days" (with a truncated Y axis, for good show) and not something a little more logical, like, say, "average temperature".   
4. Do you understand the difference between temperature and heat?
5. The kicker is, you obviously think "global warming" means "'murica warming".

One way to tell how much a guy knows about a subject is to look at the sources he uses.  You've never cited any sort of actual scientific source; you've made it clear that you've gotten all of your information on the issue from random bloggers and think tanks.  Of course, an actual scientific paper would have equations and big words, and you can't be bothered to read any of that. 

Quote from: Sci Fi Fan on July 28, 2014, 09:32:12 PM
This is hilarious.

1. Why the fuck do your links always go to blogs, think tanks, news journals, or anything but a peer reviewed scientific publication? 

Because these blogs, think tanks, news journals, and anything else report the real data, highlight the attempts to change data, analyze such data, and make fun of you people for your attempts and just being wrong every time nature proves you to be idiots.  You hold academia in high regard, not me.

Quote
2. If you're going to appeal to a random internet blogger, at least appeal to one that bothers to cite his sources.

He always cites his sources.  On this article, he shows a chart with HCN data.  Did they not teach you how to compile data in college?  If you don't take his word for it, take a leap and do something you have probably never done -- do your own research!  The data is available.  It's how we correct liberal lies, like getting the real unemployment numbers, etc.  When the source data is available, you can check it out for yourself!  If you need encouragement, I'm here.

Quote
3. I love how he cherry picks "percentage of 90 degree days" (with a truncated Y axis, for good show) and not something a little more logical, like, say, "average temperature".   

I know you missed the whole "critical thinking" part of life while in college, but it's really quite easy.  There are less 90 degree days through July 23rd.  When there is more, it means it's a hotter summer.  When there is less 90 degree days, it's a cooler summer.  For example, if it was 60 degrees for 6 days, and 80 degrees for 1 day, we would say it was a cool week.  Is that confusing?   Just because he didn't make an average temp chart doesn't mean he doesn't want to or couldn't.  It just means he didn't.

Quote
4. Do you understand the difference between temperature and heat?

Most of us taught ourselves that back in the elementary school.

Quote
5. The kicker is, you obviously think "global warming" means "'murica warming".

Global cooling is global cooling.  We really should start to call it global cooling, since it looks like we're in a cooling phase now. 

Quote
One way to tell how much a guy knows about a subject is to look at the sources he uses.  You've never cited any sort of actual scientific source; you've made it clear that you've gotten all of your information on the issue from random bloggers and think tanks.  Of course, an actual scientific paper would have equations and big words, and you can't be bothered to read any of that.

Yet, my sources are right, yours are wrong, and its getting cooler.  Hmm, go figure.

If there was any basis to this climate change BS, you should be able to show that every year since the start of the Industrial Revolution is warmer than the one before. After all the number of industrialized nations has grown; Japan for example leaped directly from the medieval times directly into the industrial age. So 2013 shouldn't be the 5th warmest, it should be the warmest up to that date, and 2014 should be warmer still.

Ah, the global warming debate.  For years I was a die-hard GW person, probably one of the most die hard you ever came across.  What happened?  College, and I took several environmental classes and many science classes, from chemistry, biology, geology, and physics.  What did I learn, science is only as exact as the data and theories its using.  Also learned that some of the biggest egos, and most fragile egos, are not in politics, or Hollywood, but scientists. 

The Earth's climate is always changing, history tells us that, and always question the data and theories.  Never take it for granted that either are 100% accurate.

It's been a hell of a hot summer here in Norway, but that doesn't prove anything since it had to have been the same degrees or hotter 1000 years ago as well.

My only question is why are you global warming and environmentalists continuing to use cars, pets, aviation and fossil based electricity etc if it's destroying the planet?!

Quote from: ConservativeMe on July 29, 2014, 10:48:16 AM
Ah, the global warming debate.  For years I was a die-hard GW person, probably one of the most die hard you ever came across.  What happened?  College, and I took several environmental classes and many science classes, from chemistry, biology, geology, and physics.  What did I learn, science is only as exact as the data and theories its using.  Also learned that some of the biggest egos, and most fragile egos, are not in politics, or Hollywood, but scientists. 

The Earth's climate is always changing, history tells us that, and always question the data and theories.  Never take it for granted that either are 100% accurate.

Why did it take you so long?

Quote from: taxed on July 29, 2014, 06:53:59 AM
I know you missed the whole "critical thinking" part of life while in college, but it's really quite easy.  There are less 90 degree days through July 23rd.  When there is more, it means it's a hotter summer.  When there is less 90 degree days, it's a cooler summer.  For example, if it was 60 degrees for 6 days, and 80 degrees for 1 day, we would say it was a cool week.  Is that confusing?   

Actually there is one confusing thing about measuring how warm the summer is in that manner. Let's compare two weeks for example:

The temperatures in week 1 are 87, 87, 85, 87, 88, 89, and 89 degrees.

Week 2 has temps of 72, 75, 75, 80, 82, 88, and 91.

Week two has more days over 90, so would you consider that a warmer week? Careful! The answer may fool you.



One way we can tell is to take the average of these temperatures.

Week 1 has an average temp of 87.4.

Week 2 has an average temp of only 80.4.

So as you can see, even though more days over 90 occurred in week 2, it was overall a cooler week.

Do you see how counting days above 90 isn't a very useful way to measure temperature?

Quote from: Hector on July 29, 2014, 01:53:48 PM
Actually there is one confusing thing about measuring how warm the summer is in that manner. Let's compare two weeks for example:

The temperatures in week 1 are 87, 87, 85, 87, 88, 89, and 89 degrees.

Week 2 has temps of 72, 75, 75, 80, 82, 88, and 91.

Week two has more days over 90, so would you consider that a warmer week? Careful! The answer may fool you.

Week 1 would be more hot than week 2.  Week 2 is cooler than week 1.  The reason is because week 1 has more hot days than week 2.

Quote
One way we can tell is to take the average of these temperatures.

Week 1 has an average temp of 87.4.

Week 2 has an average temp of only 80.4.

So as you can see, even though more days over 90 occurred in week 2, it was overall a cooler week.

Correct, week 1 was more hot on average.

Quote
Do you see how counting days above 90 isn't a very useful way to measure temperature?

If there are more hot days than cold days, that means it's hotter.  If there are more cold days than hot days, that means it's colder.  If there are 20 days at 90 degrees one summer, and 2 the next summer, then the second summer was probably a cooler summer.