But they couldn't help but defend global warming in this article. They can't help but preach their religion.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-31 next last
To: justlittleoleme
No warming for a HUNDRED YEARS doesn’t mean there isn’t any..............
2 posted on
02/26/2010 8:50:47 AM PST by
Red Badger
(Education makes people easy to lead, difficult to drive; easy to govern, but impossible to enslave.)
3 posted on
02/26/2010 8:50:53 AM PST by
combat_boots
(The Lion of Judah cometh. Hallelujah. Gloria Patri, Filio et Spirito Sancto.)
To: justlittleoleme
I have looked all over my house for a life-size replica of the Eiffel Tower. I haven’t found one yet, but that doesn’t mean it’s not here. In fact, the evidence is overwhelming that I do own such a monstrosity.
4 posted on
02/26/2010 8:51:09 AM PST by
ClearCase_guy
(We're all heading toward red revolution - we just disagree on which type of Red we want.)
To: justlittleoleme
NYT??? I think I just saw a pig fly by.
5 posted on
02/26/2010 8:51:28 AM PST by
norwaypinesavage
(Galileo: In science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of one individual)
To: justlittleoleme
Let me get this strait...the data indicates that there has been no warming for the last 100+ years, but trust us, the planet is getting warmer, is that what they're saying?.
That's too rich.
To: justlittleoleme
7 posted on
02/26/2010 8:52:50 AM PST by
Phantom Lord
(Fall on to your knees for the Phantom Lord)
To: justlittleoleme
Huh???
Et tu New York Times???
Cr*p! The end of is nigh, I tell you!!!
Al Goracle better start looking for a new scam!
Cheers
To: justlittleoleme
This article is from January 26, 1989.
It would help to point that out.
10 posted on
02/26/2010 8:55:13 AM PST by
Mr Rogers
(I loathe the ground he slithers on!)
To: justlittleoleme
This issue has jumped the shark. Its over.
SnakeDoc
12 posted on
02/26/2010 8:57:16 AM PST by
SnakeDoctor
(Do you know if the hotel is pager friendly? [...] I'm not getting a sig on my beeper.)
To: justlittleoleme
Of course, this article was published in 1989...
Will the NYT’s offer a retraction? I won’t hold my breath.
Cheers
To: justlittleoleme
I wonder if there as any adjustment in the data for weather station location? If not, then the level of urbanization during that timeframe would actually mask a cooling trend, the heat island effect (plus other changes including paint vs whitewash) skewing temps higher.
14 posted on
02/26/2010 8:58:20 AM PST by
NonValueAdded
("Roll back Pelosi" Rush Limbaugh, 2/12/10)
To: justlittleoleme
New Reports Show Global Cooling Trend
Originally printed at http://www.nbcaugusta.com/weather/news/16011587.html
New scientific studies suggest a trend that may have started in the late 1990s. The earth may be cooling.
The Hadley Centre for Climate Change, part of the UK Met Office, tracks global temperature and shows a big drop in global temperature anomalies since January 2007. Based on the HadCRUT3 system of observed temperatures, global surface temperature anomalies have been trending down since 2001. January 2008 had the coldest anomaly since 1995.
Temperature anomaly is the difference between observed temperature and the average temperature for the same time over a period of years.
Meteorologist Anthony Watts compiled the HadCRUT3 temperature grids to make this intriguing plot of trends since 1988. Note the large drop in global temperature anomaly over the past year
Closer to home, Dr John Christy of the University of Alabama, Huntsville, uses NASA data to track global temperatures. His latest report suggests that compared to seasonal norms, January 2008 was the coldest month since July 2006 and the coldest January since 2000.
Anecdotal evidence of the cooling trend is noted by record season snowfall totals and low temperatures over large portions of the northern Hemisphere. Please visit the NOAA Climate website for more information.
http://www.nbcaugusta.com/internal?st=print&id=16011587&path=/weather/news
15 posted on
02/26/2010 8:58:45 AM PST by
ETL
(ALL (most?) of the Obama-commie connections at my FR Home page: http://www.freerepublic.com/~etl/)
To: justlittleoleme
As a nominally left-wing scientist friend told me when he heard about this stuff: “The #$%%$#s pooched primary data. Game over.” As a scientist, you can axe-murder your assistants, have passionate public affairs with small mammals and inanimate objects, and sacrifice puppies to Satan, but you can’t do that.
To: justlittleoleme
I can’t wait to hear how the EPA responds to this when Peabody Energy presents this in court.
17 posted on
02/26/2010 9:01:15 AM PST by
DManA
To: justlittleoleme
18 posted on
02/26/2010 9:05:49 AM PST by
Jewbacca
(The residents of Iroquois territory may not determine whether Jews may live in Jerusalem.)
To: justlittleoleme
The article is dated 1989.
Another possibility, he said [Hansen}, was that there were special conditions in the United States that would tend to offset a warming trend. For example, industrial activity produces dust and other solid particles that help form liquid droplets in the atmosphere. These droplets reflect radiation away from Earth and thus have a cooling influence. Then why do they complain about pollution if pollution is really a "coolant" for the atmosphere?
20 posted on
02/26/2010 9:10:07 AM PST by
DallasDeb
(USAFA '06 Mom)
To: justlittleoleme
Dr. Kirby Hanson, the meteorologist who led the study, said in a telephone interview that the findings concerning the United States do not necessarily ''cast doubt'' on previous findings of a worldwide trend toward warmer temperatures, nor do they have a bearing one way or another on the theory that a buildup of pollutants is acting like a greenhouse and causing global warming. He said that the United States occupies only a small percentage of Earth's surface and that the new findings may be the result of regional variations.First, how many temperature monitoring stations are there worldwide? How accurate are they? How long have they been there?
Second, since the earth is 70% covered in water, how are they measuring the temperature in that 70% area?
More fraud on display.
21 posted on
02/26/2010 9:11:09 AM PST by
Erik Latranyi
(Too many conservatives urge retreat when the war of politics doesn't go their way.)
To: justlittleoleme
This from the NYTimes? Oh my...
22 posted on
02/26/2010 9:12:58 AM PST by
devane617
(VOTE THEM OUT! ALL OF THEM!)
To: justlittleoleme
“It is based on temperature and precipitation readings taken at weather stations around the country from 1895 to 1987.”
This article was written in 1989 when there was still sanity and integrity in the climate science community. In the 1990’s Clinton as president and Gore as VP began the effort to politicize the government funding of climate science. This is when the famous Michael Mann "hockey stick" graph gained prominence and the extensive global warming fraud began to dominate funding and the climate science scholarship.
To: justlittleoleme
Marked for shoving into libs faces...
26 posted on
02/26/2010 9:26:46 AM PST by
Crim
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-31 next last
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson