May’s Global Temperature coldest in 9 years

[billvon 2,400]

43 minutes ago, The Hundredth Monkey said:

9 out of ten Covid deaths are fully vaccinated after all...

Here's a question for you.  It involves logic.

When 100% of the people are fullly vaccinated, what percentage of COVID deaths will be fully vaccinated?

(Up next - 99% of people who die in car crashes in the US die in a car with a seat belt.)

[lippy 771]

23 minutes ago, The Hundredth Monkey said:

Tomorrows news, today...

yesterday...

https://theinfowar.tv/watch?id=63139bdc3b29c8472ebd1de5

I asked for a credible source and you supply an Alex Jones link.  

[jakee 1,254]

6 minutes ago, lippy said:

I asked for a credible source and you supply an Alex Jones link.  

You’ll have to explain to him why that’s a problem.

[wolfriverjoe 1,340]

8 minutes ago, lippy said:

I asked for a credible source and you supply an Alex Jones link.  

Did you expect anything else?

To his point:
There have been billions of vaccines administered throughout the world. 
A handful (less than a thousand) deaths that can be actually linked to the vax.

OTOH, there have been somewhere above 20 million deaths from Covid.

Despite what Rhys wants to believe, deaths from Covid in the US have been well above 80% unvaxxed.

[lippy 771]

11 minutes ago, jakee said:

You’ll have to explain to him why that’s a problem.

You think he's trolling or legit believes that crap?

[wolfriverjoe 1,340]

9 minutes ago, lippy said:

You think he's trolling or legit believes that crap?

Given his history on here, under a variety of names, Rhys is a 'true believer'.

The 'Jews', the Rothchilds, the "Illuminati" control the world.

9/11 was an inside job. I haven't heard him say 'nanothermite' in a while, but it's really just a matter of time.

Now he believes the vax is deadlier than Covid, that Ivermectin & HCQ are 'secret' cures that 'the doctors don't want you to know about'.
All the standard shit. 
All because he knows more than everyone else. Not just 'anyone' else, but everyone who doesn't believe his crap.

His comments on why InfoWars shouldn't be dismissed outright as fraud is typical.
(Hint: InfoWars is garbage through and through)

[wmw999 2,121]

1 hour ago, lippy said:

You think he's trolling or legit believes that crap?

Yes.

Wendy P.

[olofscience 421]

On 9/4/2022 at 7:26 PM, The Hundredth Monkey said:

What makes you say that, you said that months ago, but you seem awefuly sure of yourself, while distancing yourself from explanation.

You don't get to pretend you are simply correct, you must explain yourself.

Just bumping this before it's forgotten.

I explained my post, no rebuttal then?

 

Thought so.

[brenthutch 383]

Bumping is expressly forbidden on this forum, if the mods are doing their job, we won’t enjoy your tomfoolery for another month…..or will we?

[wmw999 2,121]

Brent is right; bumping for the sake of bumping is not allowed. A regular offense is likely to get a formal warning; a first one, verbal. Introduce new material  

Wendy P. 

[billvon 2,400]

18 minutes ago, Slim King said:

I love FACTS!!!!!  

I have a feeling you will hate these facts.

[olofscience 421]

6 hours ago, wmw999 said:

Brent is right; bumping for the sake of bumping is not allowed. A regular offense is likely to get a formal warning; a first one, verbal. Introduce new material  

Wendy P. 

Was not aware of this rule, but noted.

[billvon 2,400]

2 hours ago, Slim King said:

I love facts even though these are out of context  . . . 

Actual temperature rises are not part of the context of worldwide global warming?

OK then.

Quote

But even then the best you can do is a little over one degree increase in over 170 years?

Are you even following the discussion here?

In any case, sounds like you dislike facts.

[olofscience 421]

1 hour ago, billvon said:

Actual temperature rises are not part of the context of worldwide global warming?

OK then.

Are you even following the discussion here?

In any case, sounds like you dislike facts.

He probably thinks that he knows what 'natural variability' is because he notices the daily temperature change at home.

So he'd think a 1.0 degree C increase was small.

But it just shows he doesn't know what "global mean surface temperature anomaly" means. None of the deniers have, actually...you'd think they'd know what it is by now, given they keep posting (distorted) graphs of it!

Edited September 6, 2022 by olofscience

[brenthutch 383]

8 hours ago, billvon said:

I have a feeling you will hate these facts.

More facts

[SkyDekker 1,122]

20 hours ago, The Hundredth Monkey said:

 

So your understanding is what you got from a picture? Figures.

[SkyDekker 1,122]

20 hours ago, The Hundredth Monkey said:

Yeah It matters not, maybe the owner is a full blown communist, who cares.

I'm talking internet decorum.

Yeah whenever you get challenged you move the goal posts. Is that part of your scientific method? Move the goal posts until they fit your hypothesis…..

[SkyDekker 1,122]

4 hours ago, brenthutch said:

More facts

Why does your chart end almost 100 years ago?

[brenthutch 383]

27 minutes ago, SkyDekker said:

Why does your chart end almost 100 years ago?

Better?

[SkyDekker 1,122]

1 minute ago, brenthutch said:

Better?

No, that is an entirely different measurement.

I guess this is what happens when the "scientific method" is looking at pictures.

[brenthutch 383]

10 minutes ago, SkyDekker said:

No, that is an entirely different measurement.

I guess this is what happens when the "scientific method" is looking at pictures.

Well it just going to have to do. BTW my picture was in response to Bill’s picture.

[SkyDekker 1,122]

1 minute ago, brenthutch said:

Well it just going to have to do. BTW my picture was in response to Bill’s picture.

I know.

My expectations for you don't reach much further than being able to post pictures.

[brenthutch 383]

16 minutes ago, SkyDekker said:

I know.

My expectations for you don't reach much further than being able to post pictures.

Just wait until next week when I share NOAA’s global temperature report.

[brenthutch 383]

27 minutes ago, SkyDekker said:

I know.

My expectations for you don't reach much further than being able to post pictures.

Just for you 

“In this paper, the effect of forcing an ice-sheet model with several different temperature reconstructions on the Holocene evolution of the Greenland ice sheet is studied. The results show that forcing an ice-sheet model with temperature reconstructions that contain a Holocene climatic optimum that has a sustained period where the temperatures are above present-day values lead to a minimum in ice sheet volume in the early to mid-Holocene. It was further found that applying temperature reconstructions without a Holocene climatic optimum, for example as used in the SeaRISE assessment (Bindschadler and others, Reference Bindschadler2013), leads to a continued mass loss through the Holocene, approaching a steady state in the late Holocene and the smallest ice volume is reached at present day.”

https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-glaciology/article/effect-of-a-holocene-climatic-optimum-on-the-evolution-of-the-greenland-ice-sheet-during-the-last-10-kyr/1B273853FF3CE712602B3AA90A0E57DB

[SkyDekker 1,122]

4 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

Just for you 

“In this paper, the effect of forcing an ice-sheet model with several different temperature reconstructions on the Holocene evolution of the Greenland ice sheet is studied. The results show that forcing an ice-sheet model with temperature reconstructions that contain a Holocene climatic optimum that has a sustained period where the temperatures are above present-day values lead to a minimum in ice sheet volume in the early to mid-Holocene. It was further found that applying temperature reconstructions without a Holocene climatic optimum, for example as used in the SeaRISE assessment (Bindschadler and others, Reference Bindschadler2013), leads to a continued mass loss through the Holocene, approaching a steady state in the late Holocene and the smallest ice volume is reached at present day.”

https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-glaciology/article/effect-of-a-holocene-climatic-optimum-on-the-evolution-of-the-greenland-ice-sheet-during-the-last-10-kyr/1B273853FF3CE712602B3AA90A0E57DB

Yes I should have added that posting articles/studies you didn't read is also part of the expectation of yo. But figured it is pretty close to just posting pictures.