Of course, the study published in October was never given coverage by the MSM, the IPCC or the AGW warmist alliance faithful.
Yes it was it just wasn't headline news because it did not prove what you are claiming, here's an explanation:
Kullman's peer-reviewed article was published in the Nordic Journal
of Botany online pending the release of a forthcoming paper edition of the Journal. Since its findings refute the catastrophic predictions of
what a warmer climate would be like in reality, it has been largely ignored until now.
Yet another assertion, presumably if you say it enough times you start to believe it....oops yes you are already there.
With the breaking story and upcoming edition, Kuullman's observations should become the subject of much more discussion, and derision from the AGW
priests and proselytizers of the CAGW orthodoxy.
And yet more.......(who is proselytising now....)
This study follows closely on other recent "revelations" of the obvious: the warming has paused despite explosive growth in GHG emissions, the lack of
ocean inundation and decreased rates of rise in sea levels, the lack of a connection between extreme weather events and AGW climate "modeling," and
the extraordinary cold gripping the Earth ahead of the winter solstice.
And yet another wrong assumption. Did you know that 96% of the heat is absorbed by the oceans and that only 2% heats the atmosphere. That means ,
that the slightest change in oceanic heat absorption and the atmosphere could warm quite significantly. Oceanic heat absorption has now been added to
the models.....and does not make nice reading. Buy hey , carry on and ignore this research since it contradicts your assertion.
What cold gripping the Earth ahead of the winter solstice? It's freaking warm here. I put up the Xmas lights dressed in my shirt sleeves. You are
showing an astonishing level of ignorance about the influence of the jet stream on localised
Some of us have likely heard that the coldest temperatures ever recorded on the planet were detected by recent satellite observations (despite warmist
assertions that the greatest effects of AGW would be seen at the poles).
Most of the world is probably unaware that similar satellite measurements have revealed the our oceans are not rising as fast as the fear-mongers want
them to believe.
Well that's a jaw dropper. One single point at the coldest part of the earth proves global warming is not occurring. With that kind of ignorance make
no wonder you come to the wrong conclusions....sheesh, words fail me.....
Swedish climate scientist Lennart Benggston has completed and published his analysis of 20 years' worth of satellite measurements of ocean levels
around the globe. Amazingly, and of course un-reportedly, he has found that the measurements reveal that rising sea levels have NOT accelerated, as
claimed by the IPCC and other AGW advocates/alarmists. Rather, they have followed the same trend since the end of the last ice age, taking tectonic
movement and "rebound" into account as lad springs-back after being compressed under ice.
It should be abundantly clear by now that the bogus alarmist warnings and failed "projections" prove that their underlying hypotheses are flawed and
skewed by political and economic interests, rather than true "climate science," which relies upon observation, measurement and empirical data instead
of tailored "models" and "adjusted" proxies that serve only to confirm the advocates biases and greed.
Yet another expression of ignorance about the scientific process. Your create a model, which gives an output, you test it, you measure things, you
match them to the models and asses why there is a difference. You do more testing, more measuring and take account of ever more systems (e.g deep sea
heat absorption) and add that to the model. and so on and so on. The model gets ever better based on observation, measurement and empirical
. This is why the models change they are getting better. But here's the killer not one model has ever resulted in a cooling they all
predict ever increasing warming
and this is with ever more data and ever more sub systems added to the models.
Have you noticed that todays weather forecasts are significantly better than the ones 10 years ago? Guess what !!!!!!! they use models
predict the weather. Here's a real killer, the climate models and the weather models often run side by side because they are both developed within the
same organisation e.g. the metoffice here in the UK.
edit on 14/12/2013 by yorkshirelad because: (no reason given)