Climate Deniers like to cry about being called Climate Deniers, because, they say, that’s meant to remind people of “Holocaust Deniers”.
Well,… yeah.
No, I won’t give them a link. You’ll just have to trust me. The Nazi website cuts and pastes a story from Marc Morano’s Climate Depot site, then comments –
Daily Stormer:
The fact that they were able to pull off this hoax – and are in fact still pulling it off, though to a slightly less extent – should make us question everything else about the mainstream narrative of what is happening in reality.
There was never any evidence for this hoax. The ice core samples show the opposite of what they say they show. The whole thing was just a massive lie, where all of these people were just lying straight to your face.
Global warming, while not as important of a hoax as the Holocaust, is almost a bigger hoax. The Holocaust was said to have happened in the 40s, when information was exactly six million times harder to come by than today. Also, all of the “evidence” was sealed behind the iron curtain, so no one could even investigate the sites where it was supposed to have happened until the 90s. By the time people went there in the 90s and were like “um, there are no gas chambers here, the one that they are saying is a gas chamber is a “reconstruction,” and there are no mass graves at all or any evidence that any more than a few people died of starvation and disease in these work camps” the narrative was already fixed.
Global warming was just a straight lie to your face about information you have easy access to.
And they have gotten away with it.
They follow with a link to “The Great Global Warming Swindle”, starring John Christy.
FYI, if your crazy nephew is a Nazi, you can share some more accurate information in regard to the Climate Depot piece, below.
A number of climate scientists have been quick to point out that Lawson is completely wrong to claim that the average global temperature has “slightly declined” since 2007. In stark contrast to Lawson’s claim, the global surface temperature over this period has risen, with the three hottest years on record occurring in 2014, 2015 and 2016.
Reblogged this on AGR Daily News Service.
I didn’t see in my scan of the Carbon Brief summary whether BBC4 addressed its “balanced coverage” policy after that interview. Anybody catch that?
Inbred dolts who deny the Holocaust also deny climate change. huh. Very unsurprising.
Even for this site this article is a bit much.
direct cut and paste
while that is true the trust of the article is to try and equate doubters with the nazi movement and that is simply political BS.
Yes, in fact the opposite is true. The nazi movement if full of climate deniers. Well, you day doubters but they’re the same.
https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/styles/large/public/2016-07/temperature-download1-2016.png is NASA own record. If you notice not much change, essentially zero for about 90 years and than a jump of about 1/2 degree F which considering the short record means zero. By way of comparison a NASA study of the melting off of the ice at the end of the last ice age had millions of square miles a mile thick in places melting off in a few hundred years. A blip of 20 years of 1/2 degree F is a lot less. Since again per NASA the world is about 5 or 6 percent warmer purely from current changes in orbit and tilt and will be for the next 25000 years, this blip is more likely to be caused by that than any minor change in CO2. Per Modtran, a co2 model, doubling the CO2 will increase the temperature about 0.67 degrees, the co2 has not gotten anywhere near doubling from pre industrial times so the warming will be a lot less from than to today.
If you look at the graft, you notice the RSS and UAH data was put on top of the surface data making the graft appear warmer than it actually is. Also the period from about 1998 to 2008 was a warm period, a tiny warm period not found in the prior short record back to 1900, It is not unlike the periods found back in the medieval warm period say 1000 AD when long periods of warm prevailed. In any case the idea 10 years is somehow representative of the future is a bit of a stretch. STAR not included in the graft pretty lines actually shows temperatures declining and has for decades which is the reason the political types over at NASA left it out of the graft. Mann did that to make sure his hockey stick showed an uptick, 80 years of records left out. Hansen did the same thing with Giss, assumes all arctic records are incorrect so adjusts them upwards. The Brits adjust the adjustments for the same reason with their Hadcrut data.
Yawn……. 😴
The contiguous USA represents less than 2% of the earth’s surface.
So regional effects are not surprising.
YOU MUST TRY HARDER
If you look at the graft a mistake you repeat time and again. Do try to learn the correct terminology.
And your assessment of the reasons as to why adjustments were needed is totally off. But then you have been told this time and again. By now you have had so many grafts this is the reason for your thick skin.
It’s not a mistake – Bates is being an ass on purpose.
Bates, you moron!!!
That graph is of temperature ===> ANOMALY <===, not a graph of temperature.
Is shows VERY CLEARLY that temp's have shot up dramatically and significantly since 1950 – just like real scientists have been saying for decades.
Notice how before 1970, anomalies were on both sides of the "0" anomaly line? And after 1970, all the anomalies are positive and consistently 1-3.5 degrees positive?
That is a graph of your stupidity, because what you think disproves AGW actually demonstrates it.
It's the same stupid shit from stupid Bates the Stupid Moron of Stupid. – he comes here sharing a graph which disproves his position, never acknowledges it, and then comes back with yet another Stoopidity demonstration.
Per Modtran, a co2 model
The other commenters have told you time and time again that modtran isn’t a climate model; it doesn’t take into account the effect of increased H2O in the atmosphere when the co2/sf6/ch3/cfc/etc. increases the energy imbalance. The variance in cyclical temps in deep time (looking backward) can’t be explained with co2 alone and the amplification from moisture in the atmosphere must be taken into account because it is a more ‘potent’ greenhouse gas.
this blip is more likely to be caused by that than any minor change in CO2
You just said yourself Milankovich cycles work on a 25,000 year time scale. That means you can’t blame any sharp 30 year acceleration of temps on them. According to these natural cycles we should be declining slowly back into another ice age right now, so it further makes no sense to blame them for an increase in temperature.
Thou shall not lie Tom Bates, thou shall not lie; you’re gonna wind up in your fictitious hell if you keep lying to such a brazen degree.
*ch4
What I am concerned about for the future of my kids and you is pollution which in most of the world continues unabated. In Kenya and India, two places visited the mental set is dump it in the nearest stream and dump it outside of my space, who cares. That mindset is in many places worldwide. Spending a fortune on a none existent problem will does mean less ,a lot less to spend on cleaning up after ourselves.
As an equal and actually more important problem is the unending expansion of human numbers. The USA is not immune to that problem either. For example. Yellowstone park is so crowded they are going to put in controls as to when you can come, Just think a reservation ten years in advance is likely. Went down the colorado river 30 years ago, needed no reservations years in advance, you need them now and thanks to that cut in the supply the prices for going down the river are out of the reach of a whole lot of people. Human population increases do have a cost, a heavy cost, much more than CO2.
Global population will stabilize this century at about 10 billion, given current trends, and there are resources for all, if we manage it properly. See Hans Rosling for some brilliant graphics – sadly, this very wise man died last year.
https://www.ted.com/talks/hans_rosling_on_global_population_growth
Climate change is the comet that could crash into the very unstable edifice and destroy our hopes.
It is well worth googling Hans Rosling, who was a brilliant presenter and visualizer of data.
This guy makes the assumption climate change and resource depletion won’t impoverish us in the long run and we instead continue to progress to higher standards of livings from a greater degree of global wealth per capita. It also assumes some progressive means of wealth distribution, where education is affordable and upward mobility is readily available.
These assumptions don’t seem congruent with the current trends in the first world where the middle class is becoming impoverished.
Hans Rosling was an excellent speaker and produced some beautiful graphics, but he was a “brightsider” who ignored many inconvenient realities. Climate change and the present economic/societal system are indeed leading us to a “crash”.
Here is Bates playing Page Two of the Koch handbook:
“Don’t talk about building renewable energy – talk about anything which distracts people from that”
So, here Bates is talking about river pollution in India (!) and the ever-popular shiny Squirrel – overpopulation.
You didn’t think for a moment that he *actually* cares about his children’s futures, did you?
What I am concerned about for the future of my kids and you is pollution which in most of the world continues unabated.
But you know what the difference between those places and the US is, right? We have something called the EPA that sets standards based on science and regulates on the otherwise free market. We strike a balance between private profit and social costs. But let me guess, you’re in the ‘abolish the EPA’ camp, am I right?
Spending a fortune on a none existent problem will does mean less ,a lot less to spend on cleaning up after ourselves.
Clean energy kills two birds with one stone: it stops the $300-500B/yr damages the coal industry does in health and property damage you pay for with your taxes and health care premiums and the property value losses from fracking and it stops man made climate change. It’s not the false dichotomy you implied. With just the trillions the coal industry gets out of paying through transfer mispricing we could get clean energy up and running on the large scale. Even if you’re a free market fantasy believer, you have to admit that were coal’s externalities transferred back to its product through adjudication in the court system, such that its true market value is discovered (i.e. around 30 cents per kwh) then clean energy is the correct way forward.
The Daily Stormer should get a Nobel Prize in ‘lying with statistics’:
1) Their graph is a 90-day average? We’re still talking about CLIMATE, yes? These people will always dial up the noise in the climate signal, as noise makes it easier to cherry-pick start dates.
2) A ’90-day trailing mean’ means exactly this: “Hey, Martha? Did you know the Fall of 2006 was WARMER than the Spring of 2017? Climate, Slimate!”
3) Gore’s Nobel win was announced Oct 12, 2007. The Daily Stormer graph says this award came almost a year earlier, in late 2006.
Hey, whatever it takes to sell the narrative. Consider Stormers audience: how discerning is a holocaust denier going to be?
Most grafts are averages of some kind, they have to be unless you are grafting in real time a mean is a typical average. A 90 day average will chart long term climate changes and is not unreasonable. It seems to me you defeat your argument when you go into details you do not appear to understand.
Most grafts are averages of some kind
FYI, this is an example of a graft: http://cf.ydcdn.net/1.0.1.80/images/main/A5graft1.jpg
And this is an example of a graph: https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B0pXYsr8qYS6Y29OSlgxaFBlZ0k
And BTW, when are you going to retract (and apologize for) the lies you told about NASA/GISS well over a year ago?
Tom Bates: “A 90 day average will chart long term climate changes.”
So will a 90 second average. The latter will just have a whole lot more noise in it, and if what you REALLY want is your audience to zero in on TWO cherry-picked data points, the more noise the better.
For example, I noticed that one of the links showed a tweet by Gareth S Jones.
https://twitter.com/GarethSJones1/status/895567328695300096
Dr Jones’ upper graph shows the 30-day mean temperature. This obviously would have more noise than a 90-day mean: PERFECT for a cherry pick. Here we find a single data point at the end of 2006 that makes a beautiful cherry-pick. So you see I’ve done Daily Stormer one better (although I still have to pretend Al Gore’s Nobel was announced a year before it actually was).
Call me ‘Hourly Stormer’…
Daily Stormer neglects to mention that US & Allied forces captured the western half of Germany where there were/are many eye witness accounts by American soldiers of the camps, not to mention photographs, and then testimony from the prisoners themselves. Also the Iron Curtain happened after WW2 and the West German prison camps were never hidden behind it.
I have encountered Holocaust Deniers, and they are just as impervious to documented facts and eyewitness accounts as Climate Change Deniers are to scientific evidence. And Holocaust Deniers to a man or woman denied Climate Change.
On many sites where I argued with Climate Change Deniers, I pointed out this similarly, and got a uniform response: How DARE you compare us to Holocaust Deniers! Yet none of them would reject the support of Holocaust Deniers commenting on the same sites. My angle was always: when you find yourself on the same side as the neo-Nazis, you have to ask yourself “Is this the right place for me?”
And recently, I have found those same Climate Change Deniers rushing to defend the Holocaust Deniers and White Supremacists who created havoc in Charlottesville, Va, leading to the murder of an innocent woman. This alliance of Climate Change Denial and Holocaust Denial has come about through the medium of Donald Trump.
Indeed, if you lie down with dogs, you get up with fleas.
The morally repugnant Daily Stormer ejected by web host:
GoDaddy expels neo-Nazi site over article on Charlottesville victim.
The source of the graph grafted into the Daily Stormer / Climate Depot post was the Global Warming Policy Foundation. They have since deleted the graph, admitting that it was using an erroneous data-set.
yet it will live forever in the denial-sphere