Climatetards BTFO

End of climate change myth.

principia-scientific.org/breaking-fatal-courtroom-act-ruins-michael-hockey-stick-mann/

Other urls found in this thread:

johnosullivan.wordpress.com/2013/02/04/the-tragic-tautology-of-the-greenhouse-gas-effect/
cdiac.ornl.gov/trends/co2/vostok.html
youtube.com/watch?v=FJHMGM1qHDU
dailycaller.com/2017/07/05/exclusive-study-finds-temperature-adjustments-account-for-nearly-all-of-the-warming-in-climate-data/
nature.com/nature/journal/v392/n6678/abs/392779a0.html
archive.is/j5mDE
atmosp.physics.utoronto.ca/people/guido/PHY2502/articles/climate-records/Mann_Bradley_Hughes_1998.pdf
nature.com/article-assets/npg/nature/journal/v430/n6995/extref/nature02478-s1.htm
youtube.com/playlist?list=PLHSoxioQtwZcqdt3LK6d66tMreI4gqIC-
greenpeace.org/usa/global-warming/climate-deniers/koch-industries/
cato.org/publications/commentary/when-will-climate-scientists-say-they-were-wrong
nytimes.com/2017/06/03/us/politics/republican-leaders-climate-change.html?_r=0
rbutr.com/http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303480304579578462813553136
scientificamerican.com/article/dark-money-funds-climate-change-denial-effort/
nytimes
archive.is/XtTyN
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

>this thread will go unnoticed because muh cnn

well you noticed it, so that's something.

tfw Dr Ball lives in my city and I've run into him many times. Mann BTFO

Compliment him on his work.

Have a bump. This is bigger than climate gate.

Hope Mann goes to Jail over this.

Yes it is.

That the MSM ignores it speaks volumes.

This is effectively kicking the bucket underneath the current scheme for one world gouvernment.
Carbon taxes were meant to be the need it fulfills.
Without that, there's no point in one world gouvernment.

They'll pull every trick in and out of the book.

johnosullivan.wordpress.com/2013/02/04/the-tragic-tautology-of-the-greenhouse-gas-effect/
After wasting my time reading that site and it's about page, I found the moron who runs this site.

The language he uses sounds like a douche that thinks he sounds smart using gaudy language, but really sounds like a moron. Cherry picking one favorable scientist who's sole accomplishment is disagreeing with consensus opinion is not science.

I don't think global warming is the fear mongering threat that it's made out to be, but anyone who says it doesn't exist and isn't human caused is a contrarian tool, which most of Sup Forums is.

The MSM can't pick it up. They toe the line on every green initiative and narrative, which is predicated on the hockey stick graph being accurate. They'd have to admit they were wrong about all of it, to include the scare mongering after Trump's withdrawal from the Paris Agreement. It would be so detrimental to their credibility that some of the major outlets would likely go under.

why do people keep posting these models when the real temperature measured through the years is available. Anyone can see the climate tax is kikery

So 'what degree' is humans part in the grand scheme of things?

...

Up you go

Nothing in that article actually talks about CO2 and methane or any science, all it does is attack the character of scientist over a 27-year old graph.

Climate denial is still just a conspiracy theory

t. Green energy investor

The scientist in question refused to turn over his data in contempt of court, but no it's totally all on the up and up.

exactly.

so science hey.

so open, much peer review

Pretty good info mate. It doesn't explicitly disprove Climate Change, but it does disprove one of its leading scientists. Actually, not only disproving but showing the idiot faked his own data in order to push an agenda. Good step here but overall I think it's going to be impossible to disprove the climate change (((scientists))) due to their funding and censorship.

Top: The total daily contribution to the surface mass balance from the entire ice sheet (blue line, Gt/day). Bottom: The accumulated surface mass balance from September 1st to now (blue line, Gt) and the season 2011-12 (red) which had very high summer melt in Greenland. For comparison, the mean curve from the period 1981-2010 is shown (dark grey). The same calendar day in each of the 30 years (in the period 1981-2010) will have its own value. These differences from year to year are illustrated by the light grey band. For each calendar day, however, the lowest and highest values of the 30 years have been left out.

Are you saying people deny there is a climate? What sorta ludicrous talk is this? You, like others, don't seem to get that it's not denying 'something' is happening... but 'why' that something is happening is the debate.

>hurrdurr... muh 100% man made climate

Hm so you're a retard. Sad. The only reason the global warming hoax exists is to justify carbon taxes and world government. The ONLY solution to pollution is population reduction yet the globalist niggers are trying to grow the population with high-pollution third world scum. Given that fact it's clearly a scam and they know it too

KYS you globalist cuck

Mann is such a weasel, these treasonous fucks are in all levels of our societies though and I can't see how we can be rid of them without bloodshed.

Vostok ice core research: cdiac.ornl.gov/trends/co2/vostok.html

In essence, though there is a correlation between a rise in temperatures and carbon, there is no causation.

Meme warfare.

Humour is more effective than bloodshed though.

Rises in CO2 lag temperature rises, it's a effect not a cause.

youtube.com/watch?v=FJHMGM1qHDU

this guy lays out the whole scam really well.

tripfag and
>global warming
>anyone who says it doesn't exist and isn't human caused is a contrarian tool
global warming doesn't exist as the phrase describes nothing beyond a meme someone came up with to literally sell carbon to idiots. climate change, however, does exist because the climate is in a constant state of change. neither "global warming" or general climate change of this is remotely close to the actual issue human impact on the climate (in either direction), ya dumb fuck. maybe you meant something else?

I bet mummy thought you were a smart little boy. kek

dailycaller.com/2017/07/05/exclusive-study-finds-temperature-adjustments-account-for-nearly-all-of-the-warming-in-climate-data/

EXCLUSIVE: Study Finds Temperature Adjustments Account For ‘Nearly All Of The Warming’ In Climate Data

Yep.

We need to redpill all nogs on climate change with memes on nog Twitter and facebook

>Tfw climate policies kill nog jobs
>Tfw carbon tax is viewed as racist
>Tfw it's racist to disagree with the nogs

Hey retard the direction of gravity is towards the centre of mass of an object.

Is there any way to confirm this? I'm unfamiliar with either one of the scientists work and my Google searches don't come up with anything

Pic unrelated now get back to dicking kangaroos or red pill some nogs

...

ad hominem is the wokest form of argumentation

Thanks for taking the time to check this out.
All the autists disagreeing with you just have confirmation bias

lmao somebody went through the trouble to draw that bait

Please let this be a huge thing instead of something that gets swept under the rug.

Is it enough to silence this faggot once and for all though ausbro? He often shills about this shit in his videos.

Let meme magic make it so!

Who is that faggot?

Fucking Idiots, first consider the second graph is ONLY considering EUROPE. And then also consider that Michael Mann has it relative to 1960-1990 while Tim Ball has a line for the average of the entire 20th Century. These graphs have different baselines and so would obviously look different, plus different geographically locations.

too bad the MBH study has been replicated by a dozen more studies, using a wealth of different proxies from locations all around the globe

Then why would he feel the need to be in contempt of court rather than reveal his data?

You are missing the point

this is a court case and he is willing to risk criminal charges and potential jail time rather than reveal his data.

That is not science.

you didn't even archive.is it?

you can easily look up their data in both the original 1998 paper and the supplementary material (where the 'hockey stick' graphic comes from) by Michael Mann, Malcolm Hughes and Raymond Bradley

nature.com/nature/journal/v392/n6678/abs/392779a0.html

ooh! dis be big

It'll be in the court records.

You can archive it if you like.

Yep, bigger than climategate, or should be at least.

THAAAANKS

archive.is/j5mDE

I'm interested:
in what journal can was this Tim Ball reconstruction published?

Alright, keep sucking Saudi and Russian cock for oil and gas while the rest of the world converts to renewable.

Can't see that because you have to pay for it. Are you 100% sure that it contains the actual DATA? Because that's unusual. Usually they only publish the stats done *to* the data (i.e graphs and tables etc), not the raw data itself.

If it already was publically available, why can't the counrt find it, nor Mann provide it for them?

you're an idiot. "renewables" entirely depend on the supply of rare earths from china to build enormous battery arrays anyway.

if you want to be energy independent you use nuclear.

Oh look, the shills are gathering.

Hit a nerve?

Need some preparation H

last chance to get on the right side of history and avoid embarrassment when all your friends have woken up.

the world appreciates your bump

I bet yours are real proud too, being able to think for yourself by disagreeing with everyone. Climate change denial exists because billions are spent on mouthpieces to say so, just like those you disagree with. Go ahead, link some one off nutter or Koch brothers propagandists.

Wow, well done that completely unfounded and idiotic statement. Very interesting you post that during what is predicted to be the hottest year on record. Which is after the previous hottest year on record, which before that the hottest year on record was before that ... and then before that

Yay, thread made front page!.

Personal first for me.

has anyone done a study on which papers and authors are now discredited for using mann's (((data)))?

thorium is the way to go, look in to it

lol,

Billions hey?, got a citation or 3 for that?

and how much funding goes into climate hype? and where does it come from?

I'm not arguing, I'm pointing out stupidity. It's a fact that most of Sup Forums is retarded and digests material through memes and propaganda.

>Hottest year on record
>Records started with any kind of accuracy around 1900, at *best*.

Nobody can get funding for that sort of thing, all the money is going to climatards.

do you need funding to do a few searches in a science db?

sounds like 30 min of work if you had access to the db

took me like 3 minutes:
the full paper, outlining their methodology:
atmosp.physics.utoronto.ca/people/guido/PHY2502/articles/climate-records/Mann_Bradley_Hughes_1998.pdf

the supplementary material, containing the full listing of data and an expanded documentation of methodology
nature.com/article-assets/npg/nature/journal/v430/n6995/extref/nature02478-s1.htm

I don't have access to those databases.

I'm just a humble user at the end of the world.

Maybe you ought to contact Mann's legal team with that then.

But you should understand why the "No Global warming because of 19 year 'pause'" is fucking ridiculous. That isn't how you draw a trend line by excluding alot of the data.

>climate denial is just a conspiracy theory
>much of climate science is based on theoretical knowledge

If anyone is interested. This is a group that is independent from oil and gas and liberal nonsense. There is a website too, but this Playlist will give you a general idea on alternative theories of climate change. Climate Change: youtube.com/playlist?list=PLHSoxioQtwZcqdt3LK6d66tMreI4gqIC-

hopefully delingpole or the scientist bloke will get on it

why would I need to contact Mann about his own work?
I should be contacting the people trying to use legal action to get data which available online to anyone since 1998.
And that's even assuming, that it's the MBH98 data they want.

But anyway, can you tell me where and when the scientific article was published, in which Tim Ball presents his reconstruction and outlines his methodology?

The 19 year pause shows that the models predicting where things are going to go (the same models that predict the apocalypse, and why were are bringing in legislation left and right) are trash. They are simply not reflecting reality as they are claiming it to be.

>why would I need to contact Mann about his own work?
a better question is "why would mann refuse to hand over his data if it is pulicly accessible anyway?"

presumably he might face questions on it if he allowed it to be entered, and he is not confident his approach would stand up to scrutiny

No

Nor would I even if I could.

Tell it to the judge if you care so much.

Why would he feel the need to be in contempt of court if his data is so solid hey?

I've asked twice now and got no answer.

I've already asked that twice and got no answer.

LIke im sure they wont try to come up with some other excuse
>breaking news
but whatever

greenpeace.org/usa/global-warming/climate-deniers/koch-industries/
Greenpeace sucks, but the article documents charitable donations through the Koch brothers alone, totaling over 100 million.
cato.org/publications/commentary/when-will-climate-scientists-say-they-were-wrong
Here's some propaganda from their primary recipient.
nytimes.com/2017/06/03/us/politics/republican-leaders-climate-change.html?_r=0

This is just the top of google search, you can dig deeper and find their mouthpieces. Next time you see an article from WSJ or other big paper denying climate change, check the names.
rbutr.com/http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303480304579578462813553136
Look up the names of the people who wrote this article, or who finances the organizations they work for.
scientificamerican.com/article/dark-money-funds-climate-change-denial-effort/
half a billion in climate change denial over just 7 years, between 2003 and 2010

This is just off the top of google search. You aren't smart or clever for denying climate change, you aren't taking some 'redpilled' position just because liberals disagree with it, your biting propaganda from the other side. Both sides are full of propaganda, climate change is real, it's caused by humans, and it's not going to destroy the world. Not going to say anymore, you retards aren't even worth bothering with.

Clickbaiters into archive

>nytimes com/2017/06/03/us/politics/republican-leaders-climate-change.html?_r=0
archive.is/XtTyN

any rational observer would come to the conclusion that he has something to hide

unfortunately there are many irrational observers

>you retards aren't even worth bothering with.
and yet you still bother

thanks for the laughs.

How much funding does the IPCC get BTW? and where does it come from?

And how much public and private research grant money goes into climate "science"?

>You aren't smart or clever
hehe, he mad, somad

also, he didn't answer about the funding for the alarmist side

So basically we should let poor countries run cheap, reliable coal plants? NICE

You can say that again.

But hey if you can convince people millions were gassed in a room with a wooden door then you can convince them of anything.

if you can filter out the particulates and not pollute water with them then why not?

its over libtards, you lost AGAIN

you literally cant stop losing lmao

oy vey! did zey gass em wiz da co2?

>using a wealth of different proxies from locations all around the globe

Kind of how the NOAA used data from oceans all around the world?

It just so happened those locations were in the vicinity of a shipping barge, who's engines increase the surrounding ocean temperature.

Which accounted for literally all of the "global warming"

You kikes will do anything to obfuscate data

and knowing that you might want to take a look at some other "settled science"

Cosmology and theoretical physics is another whole bunch of Jewish bullshit and costs billions each year in wasted funding.

but it DOES stand up to scrutiny and has so for years, as I point out here take a recent example:
in 2013, the PAGES2K consortium (which consists of ~80 expert authors!) published a major study called
>Continental-scale temperature variability during the past two millennia
in nature geoscience, using 9 different proxies from every continent except Africa. Not only are their results consistent with previous similar studies, but they also found that
>There were no globally synchronous multi-decadal warm or cold intervals that define a worldwide Medieval Warm Period or Little Ice Age [...]


so you have a very simple and straighforward choice in fron of you:
either you can accept the conclusions of dozens of peer-reviewed studies, from a hundred or so authors, using a variety of different techniques and proxies, over two decades

or you can believe the unpublished opinion of a geography professor.

this was mostly a rethorical question, because there is no such paper

Answer the question.

>climate change is real, it's caused by humans

wht about the greenland ice cores?

why do you think science is a democracy? is this a combination of the appeal to authority and appeal to populism fallacies?

need I remind you of all the consensus scientific beliefs that were proved wrong?

eat shit, trillions of flies can't be wrong!

sea surface temperatures aren't measured at a few locations. The ARGO floats that take the direct measurement are distributed homogeneously across the entire world ocean.
And climatologists have already corrected for the bias that is created by ship measurements

re-state it for me please