<
There is a fundamental difference between "NASA's top experts" and 1 expert. Heck, Tony Heller even gives you the screengrab to the original story which clearly says "a leading atmospheric scientist predicts" but apparently you are not skeptic enough to spot that fundamental difference.
Not only that, this single leading 'NASA top expert' was talking about sulfur dioxide emissions from the burning fossil fuels which until then had increased rapidly and which had the potential to block out the sun which was eventually avoided by the passing of several Clean Air acts.
<
Dr David Viner said no such thing. Both you and Tony Heller have a real problem separating catchy newspaper headlines from actual quotes.
<
The quoted article clearly claims no such thing. Heller has a bit or a habit of posting selected screen-grabs of the original article (knowing full well that 99.9% of his active followers don't have a NYT subscription and will thus not go check out for themselves what the original article actually says,
<
Apparently, you are utterly unaware that the single source of that 1972 quote a) speaks about a 10,000 year period which does not counter a more immediate episode of global warming.
<
The original article does not speak of the whole of Manhattan, just parts. So you and Tony Heller just made that up (aka a lie). The only part which the article specifically speaks of is the West Side Highway which during the 2011 K?a?t?r?i?n?a? Sandy hurricane did get flooded.
<
That is not what the original article says. See if you can spot the difference: here's wat Steven Goddard/Tony Heller claims
"Arctic ice free by 2013"
which is immediately followed by the actual headline:
"Arctic summers ice-free 'by 2013'"
They weren't too far off as the absolute minimum was already reached in the summer of 2012. BTW, there is a fundamental difference between the arctic being completely ice free as Goddard/Heller would like you to believe was claimed and parts of the arctic to be sufficiently ice free to allow for (commercial) shipping.
<
...by the end of this century. Don't you and Goddard/Heller think it is a bit too soon to pass judgement on that?
<
In Scotland. Again Goddard/Heller carefully selects the bits of the original article which to show you and, more importantly, which not. From the original 2009 article:
"The amount of snow has been decreasing for the last 40 years, and there's no reason why it's going to stop now." Alex Hill, the chief government adviser with the Met Office http://www.scotsman.com/news/skiing-is-d...
<
That's 6 degrees Fahrenheit, not Celsius which Hansen was talking about in his 1986 talk to the Senate Environment Committee. How nice of Goddard/Teller to omit that little detail. Hansen also gave 3 predictions (Scenarios A, B and C) and Goddard/Teller just picked the highest one.
<
What part of "75 per cent chance of the entire polar ice cap melting during the summertime by 2014" don't you understand?
<
Why do you instantly believe whatever some bloke on a blog claims and not show not even an ounce of skepticism? Heck, some of this wild claims are TOTALLY DEBUNKED by himself in the very next copy-pasted piece of text.
Gee, and you wonder why often we call you people dumb!
I got your link for you. It is my memory which is apparently better than any alarmist's. It is funny how alarmists pretend to forget the dire predictions of not so long ago.
Come on. Are they really that forgetful? I guess that explains why they have so much trouble with their science.
A troll??? These have been raised hundreds of times before on these boards ... you either believe the science or the blogs. No point wasting time answering these questions ... please use the Yahoo Answers search feature before posting again.
Comments like those of Cyclops show deniers in their true light, they simply lie.
"Nothing they forecast has come true."
Forecasts made: "sea level will rise" - and it is and the rate of rise increased in the early 1990's
"Ice will decline" and with the exception of Antarctic sea ice it is, denier point out Antarctic sea all the time although they usually call it "Antarctic ice" to confuse the uninformed, glacial ice is what will affect sea level and that is declining.
http://climate.nasa.gov/key_indicators#l...
In fact Arctic sea ice is melting faster than was forecast.
Deniers have tried to alter what was forecast for Hurricanes, they keep bleating about fewer hurricanes but that was the forecast for "fewer but stronger Hurricanes" and we have seen a number of very powerful Hurricanes around the word but deniers only seem to want to talk about U.S. hurricanes.
Within the last 7 months the place Kano pretends he lives was struck by one of the most powerful ever recorded with over 5000 dead.
http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10...
While deniers try to pick out places that have cold spells to try and refute warming, that is getting very hard to do on a global scale.
When the world as a 12 month average in 2013 looked like this
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/service/gl...
So denier had to limit their talk to a small portion of the U.S. and try to ignore the rest of the world.
If 2014 (to date) (to date) deniers still only want to talk about the U.S., sadly the reason why is obvious.
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/service/gl...
2014 is (so far) running warmer that 2013 and 2013 was the 4th warmest year on record, this is what a denier calls cooling.
Gringo,
Hansen's report gave 3 scenarios broken up by what happened to the CO2 during that period of time. We were closest to the highest scenario in terms of amount of CO2, AND 6 degrees F and 3.3 degrees C hardly matter, because we are not even close. In fact, we are closest to the lowest scenario which had a complete end to CO2 emissions.
Further, parts of Manhatten flooding was discussing being being permanently flooded which clearly has not happened. Your crap of heavy rains causing flooding once during that period is just your way of lying to avoid the truth that you warmer's prediction have ALL failed to come true.
Your web of lies is becoming too obvious.
Oh sorry, you have a 75% chance of being right, and are wrong. That is OHH so much better.
http://www.independent.co.uk/environment...
Viner is quoted here. If he did not say this, then show me the retraction, because SURELY he would have asked for a retraction.
Fact is that you warmers like to pretend that the "deniers" are lying. They are not. They don't need to. You people stick your feet in your mouth and make outrageous claims of certainty and doom so often that lying is not necessary.
If you start being HONEST in both the amount of predicted change and the confidence in future modeling, you would not ever run into this problem.
Ha! Ha! Just look at Gringa! Defending charlatans and con artists. These were obvious falsehoods deliberately concocted to scare the unwary. Even though they have proven to be wrong, they did their job, and that is to scare some people.
The theory of the Big Lie was succinctly expounded by Adolf Hitler, an acknowledged master of the genre. Here is what Der Führer wrote in vol. I, Chapter 10 of Mein Kampf (in James Murphy' translation):
"...in the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than consciously or voluntarily; and thus in the primitive simplicity of their minds they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies in little matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods. It would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously. Even though the facts which prove this to be so may be brought clearly to their minds, they will still doubt and waver and will continue to think that there may be some other explanation. For the grossly impudent lie always leaves traces behind it, even after it has been nailed down, a fact which is known to all expert liars in this world and to all who conspire together in the art of lying."
Notice the, " the grossly impudent lie always leaves traces behind it." A lie is always effective. It will fool some people all of the time, just like Abraham Lincoln stated. These shysters are aware of the effectiveness of their dirty deeds and they heap lie after lie upon the unwary. With each lie comes the turning of people to fear of the consequences described by that lie. With enough lies out there you can convert the masses.
These broadcasters of the lie know what they are doing and they rely on the ignorant news media and the 'useful idiots', as Stalin called them, to repeat and repeat the lies, thereby spreading false hope and despair. Then these slimy wolves step in and become saviors to those who are ignorant of real science and trusting in their governments and false scientists. This has been expressed many years ago.
Quote by Club of Rome: "In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill....All these dangers are caused by human intervention....and thus the “real enemy, then, is humanity itself....believe humanity requires a common motivation, namely a common adversary in order to realize world government. It does not matter if this common enemy is “a real one or….one invented for the purpose."
These greenies come right out and tell us they are conning the masses and yet some simpletons don't believe them. They would be laughable if it weren't for the fact that they were bankrupting nations and causing undue fear among the innocents, just to name a few horrible consequences that they cause.
Gringo's definition of being an alarmist is : "someone actually activating an alarm switch"
There's been hundreds of dire consequences that have predicted that go uncorrected. That's what upsets climate science in general and convolutes the real issue : "How much warming does CO2 cause?"
Climate science hides behind their own peer-review system like it's a sacred temple of knowledge, yet when they get caught "red-handed" in their predictions 1 year later (as they sweat it out in their orifices (oops! I meant offices), they claim "Oh! That's not what I meant!"
Typical climate science arrogance!!!
... and then they have the audacity to call people "dumb"?
Got a source for all your delusions?
Or just pulling stuff out of the spare room left next to your brain in your nether regions?
Nothing they forecast has come true. All they have left are busted theories, tampered NOAA and GISS data, and fraudulent John Cook surveys.
Nasa does'nt know for sure. Scientists say what they want, but in the long run are'nt always right or near right and Man Made Climate Change destroys all LIFE. Mike
NASA’s top experts said that burning fossil fuels would trigger an ice age…
Snow is a thing of the past…
Arctic ice free by 2000…
New ice age coming…
Manhattan underwater by 2008…
Arctic ice free by 2013…
Antarctica will soon be the only place to live…
Skiing is doomed…
Six degrees warming by 2020…
Arctic ice-free by 2014...
what they have been telling us is false. Their predictions are wrong, so how can you trust the rest of what they are telling us????
Provide link to even the first one. Media headlines and wuwt does not count.
The arctic summer sea ice is disapearing and shipping is increasing. No point inpanicking until the russians are coming.
No cite so a lie
Great demonstration of Denier lemming think - one idiot Denier lies and the rest start speaking in tongues. Group-lying is still lying - yet another fact Deniers are too stupid to understand.
