96% of US NOAA Weather Stations Sited Wrong, Inflate Temperature Record
(www.heartland.org)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (44)
sorted by:
Yeah, this has been a problem for ages and it's not unique to the USA. There's loads and loads of weather stations in my country that have been keeping records for decades, sometimes since the 19th century, but back when they were built, they were in wooded areas etc., and now they're surrounded by concrete as the area around them continued to develop. But hey, this station from 1890 is showing record temperatures now so obviously we need communism or the planet will literally catch fire and we'll all die.
Speaking of which, I used to say "yeah, yeah, it'll be so hot we'll all just drop dead" as a dismissive joke, and lately I've been noticing leftists saying this without a hint of irony. I think it started with that retarded video with Bill Nye the Sex Junk Guy where he set a globe on fire. I mean, what the fuck? I'm seeing people claim that my central European country will become unlivable because somehow the local temperate climate will turn into something worse than Arizona or Saudi Arabia WHERE PEOPLE HAVE BEEN LIVING FOR THOUSANDS OF YEARS WITHOUT AIR CONDITIONING. I moved on to joking about polar bears melting, but if this becomes a serious lefty talking point in a few years too I'm probably going to turn it into a drinking game and just fucking die.
Polar Bear numbers are up. Weather temps are only up because there's more concrete and less trees. The global temps aren't rising at any alarming rate, they fluctuate all the time, and I am tired of the bullshit. Hell, right now, the sun is effecting our climate more than pollution can. That bitch is at the beginning of a bad cycle and things are going to be worse before they get better in 10 years.
Global temperatures have risen at a dramatic rate over the past 100 years, it's no where near that erratic, and yeah, polar bear numbers are up, specifically because of climate change, which has caused warmer temperatures to give Polar Bears more habitable environments with richer food supplies.
That's the difference between watermelon environmental activism and actual climate science:
And no, the sun's activity is not having a significant effect on temperature as the actual luminosity we are receiving hasn't really changed to a statistical margin, and even if it did the angle of the light has a more dramatic impact then the slight diming of one spot on a rotating gas ball 93 million miles away.
Imagine a burning gas station. Imagine you are stairing at it from 10 miles away. Now imagine a bird that is 20 feet in front of the gas station flies past your line of sight. Will you feel any cooler? No, of course you won't. the temporary minor reduction in infrared radiation will be almost impossible to notice. That's the reason why sunspots and luminosity really don't fucking mean much.
False, the Heartland data shows a rise of 2 deg per century which is nothing, not the 10 degrees that you and the IPCC(CP) shill for.
Nice strawman, and a useless metaphor to boot.
No one said anywhere that it is the sun's luminescence that matters. It's the 22 year magnetic cycle that changes the amount and energy of cosmic and solar radiation impacting the Earth's atmosphere, thus changing the cloud formation rates and altitudes.
2 degrees per century is way faster than the average, and the actually disruptive results come from 5 degrees, not 10. The average is significantly less than 1 degree per century, and it's not a linear increase, but a fluctuation. You never see an entire millennia of .5 degree increases in average temperature every century. To see the past 150 years have the largest and fastest rate of change in temperature ever recorded in human history is pretty fucking alarming.
The planet doesn't seem to have a temperature change that dramatic without getting hit by a fucking mile wide asteroid.
Yes they have for the past decade. That's why so many were harping on "Sun Spot Activity" for so many years. It was literally the predominant anti-anthropogenic argument made as of only a few years ago. You can probably find some Bill O'Riley clips about it.
That's actually even more silly. We have a magnetosphere for reason. The number of muon particles hitting the atmosphere isn't going to do shit. Changing the composition of your atmosphere by introducing massive amounts of carbon dioxide... does.