Al Gore,, You Ever been To Texas?

[guohua]

Do you even know where the State of Texas is or do any of your Elite Climate Scientist Live in Texas?
Why You ask?

Texas Sees Snow Before New York on Near-Record Cold in South

Yea, Gore can you read?

(Bloomberg) -- Houston reported its earliest snowfall ever, beating places like New York City and Boston as a cold snap descended over Texas.


George Bush Intercontinental Airport in Houston set a new record for the first observed snowfall, breaking one set on Nov. 23, 1979, according to a Twitter post from the National Weather Service. Near record-breaking cold has swept into the South, with temperatures in the state 25 degrees Fahrenheit (14 Celsius) or more below average, according to the U.S. Weather Prediction Center in College Park, Maryland.

“You can’t find any temperatures in Texas this morning that you could say are warm,” said Bob Oravec, a senior forecaster at the prediction center. “A pretty cold air mass sunk south over the weekend. We have gone right into a winter weather pattern across the central U.S.”

read the article here: Al Gore is a Scammer

[727Sky]

56 million years ago there was no ice on the north and south poles and that lasted until about 30 million years ago.. If you can get through the present ice there are alligator and turtle fossils to be found. CO2 was around 1500 parts per million if not more and the earth was on average 8C warmer..It has been warmer than now as recently as 10,000 years ago and even warmer when Rome was the big dog on the block.... If CO2 levels ever drop below around 150 we will all die for all plants will die. At present with 410 PPM the crops that do not get flooded or frozen out have a 35% increase of crop yield simple because of the higher CO2.. Talk to your plants..yep they like your emitted CO2..

There are those who are saying we are going to enter into another mini ice age.. If that is the case the globalist will be happy for there will be a couple of billion people who will starve to death.

The IPCC and the global warming alarmist have been caught to may times screwing with the numbers for their desired outcome for me to believe just about anything they have to say..

Sea level rise ??? Some coast lines are sinking and other are rising ...water will seek its own level..Many along the gulf coast are sinking including Florida and the Keys.

Look at some 130 year old photographs of the ocean and light houses...then look at any new.. calibrated eyeball says no change.. All the sea level rise measurements are not coming from the tide gauges but from satellite measurements. Satellites orbits are not perfect and they cost allot of money so use them instead of the tried and true cheap tide gauges... Also look back at all the doom forecast the IPCC and uncle scamyy Al Gore have made.. Can you find one that was accurate ? When they miss they just add another 10 years on to their forecast and start the doom crap all over again. 

I predict if the cooler guys are correct this winter will be worse than last winter and several winters to follow will continue to become worse. Crop growing season are going to get messed up due to late springs and early winters...

I could post more but why...the lines are drawn and the deniers  and the alarmist are squared off... someone is going to end up wrong.. We will just have to wait and see who is correct... My desired vote is for warming for the opposite is much death and bad times ahead..

[guohua]

@"727Sky" 
They say the Sun is going into a Quiet Stage, Good.
The problem is now, if they are right, Al Gore will start Crying that because of our  CO2 and Fluctuans (Farts) we are entering a new Ice Age, the sea's and Ocean's will drop in hieght as the two poles grow with ice and all our crops and animals will die,,,,,,, Yes,,,, get Ready For Him to start Blaming us and our pollution for this Nice Cool Weather.

[Wallfire]

Polar bear numbers are so HIGH they threaten native Inuit populations, claims controversial Canadian government report bitterly contested by environmentalists who have made creature the icon of global warming   read

[guohua]

Polar bear numbers are so HIGH they threaten native Inuit populations, claims controversial Canadian government report bitterly contested by environmentalists who have made creature the icon of global warming   read

 

[BIAD]

Er... oops.

Scientists acknowledge key errors in study of how fast the oceans are warming.

A major study claimed the oceans were warming much faster than previously thought.
But researchers now say they can’t necessarily make that claim.

'Scientists behind a major study that claimed the Earth’s oceans are warming faster than previously
thought now say their work contained inadvertent errors that made their conclusions seem more certain
than they actually are.

Two weeks after the high-profile study was published in the journal Nature, its authors have submitted
corrections to the publication. The Scripps Institution of Oceanography, home to several of the researchers
involved, also noted the problems in the scientists' work and corrected a news release on its website, which
previously had asserted that the study detailed how the Earth’s oceans “have absorbed 60 percent more heat
than previously thought.”

“Unfortunately, we made mistakes here,” said Ralph Keeling, a climate scientist at Scripps, who was a co-author
of the study. “I think the main lesson is that you work as fast as you can to fix mistakes when you find them.”

The central problem, according to Keeling, came in how the researchers dealt with the uncertainty in their
measurements. As a result, the findings suffer from too much doubt to definitively support the paper’s conclusion
about how much heat the oceans have absorbed over time.

The central conclusion of the study — that oceans are retaining ever more energy as more heat is being trapped
within Earth’s climate system each year — is in line with other studies that have drawn similar conclusions.
And it hasn’t changed much despite the errors. But Keeling said the authors' miscalculations mean there is a much
larger margin of error in the findings, which means researchers can weigh in with less certainty than they thought.

“I accept responsibility for what happened because it’s my role to make sure that those kind of details got conveyed,”
Keeling said. (He has published a more detailed explanation of what happened here.)

The study’s lead author was Laure Resplandy of Princeton University. Other researchers were with institutions in China,
Paris, Germany and the U.S. National Center for Atmospheric Research and Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Laboratory.

“Maintaining the accuracy of the scientific record is of primary importance to us as publishers and we recognize our
responsibility to correct errors in papers that we have published,” Nature said in a statement to The Washington Post.
“Issues relating to this paper have been brought to Nature’s attention and we are looking into them carefully.
We take all concerns related to papers we have published very seriously and will issue an update once further
information is available.”

The original study, which appeared Oct. 31, derived a new method for measuring how much heat is being absorbed by
the oceans. Essentially, the authors measured the volume of gases, specifically oxygen and carbon dioxide, that have
escaped the ocean in recent decades and headed into the atmosphere as it heats up.
They found that the warming “is at the high end of previous estimates” and suggested that as a result, the rate of global
warming itself could be more accelerated.

The results, wrote the authors, may suggest there is less time than previously thought to curb greenhouse gas emissions.
The study drew considerable media attention, including from The Post.

However, not long after publication, an independent Britain-based researcher named Nicholas Lewis published a lengthy
blog post saying he had found a “major problem” with the research.
“So far as I can see, their method vastly underestimates the uncertainty,” Lewis said in an interview Tuesday, “as well as
biasing up significantly, nearly 30 percent, the central estimate.”

Lewis added that he tends “to read a large number of papers, and, having a mathematics as well as a physics background,
I tend to look at them quite carefully, and see if they make sense. And where they don’t make sense -with this one, it’s fairly
obvious it didn’t make sense -I look into them more deeply.”

Lewis has argued in past studies and commentaries that climate scientists are predicting too much warming because of
their reliance on computer simulations, and that current data from the planet itself suggests global warming will be less
severe than feared.

It isn’t clear whether the authors agree with all of Lewis’s criticisms, but Keeling said “we agree there were problems
along the lines he identified.” Paul Durack, a research scientist at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California,
said that promptly acknowledging the errors in the study “is the right approach in the interests of transparency.”

But he added in an email, “This study, although there are additional questions that are arising now, confirms the long known
result that the oceans have been warming over the observed record, and the rate of warming has been increasing,” he said.

Gavin Schmidt, head of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies, followed the growing debate over the study closely
on Twitter and said that measurements about the uptake of heat in the oceans have been bedeviled with data problems for
some time -and that debuting new research in this area is hard.

“Obviously you rely on your co-authors and the reviewers to catch most problems, but things still sometimes slip through,”
Schmidt wrote in an email. Schmidt and Keeling agreed that other studies also support a higher level of ocean heat content
than the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, or IPCC, saw in a landmark 2013 report.
Overall, Schmidt said, the episode can be seen as a positive one.

“The key is not whether mistakes are made, but how they are dealt with -and the response from Laure and Ralph here is
exemplary. No panic, but a careful reexamination of their working — despite a somewhat hostile environment,” he wrote.

“So, plus one for some post-publication review, and plus one to the authors for reexamining the whole calculation in a
constructive way. We will all end up wiser.”...'

WashingtonPost:

Science... yer' gotta love it!

[guohua]

@"BIAD"  “Unfortunately, we made mistakes here,” said Ralph Keeling, a climate scientist at Scripps, who was a co-author
of the study. “I think the main lesson is that you work as fast as you can to fix mistakes when you find them.”

Yes, I read that article to and that one statement says it all.
They work as fast as they can to Promote Al Gores Bull-Shit and don't double or triple check their findings, they just run to the Bank and Cash That Check! 
The "Unfortunate" part he meant was, They Got caught!