PDA

View Full Version : An 850,000 year climate review.



LWW
01-03-2011, 10:51 AM
http://www.wmconnolley.org.uk/sci/iceage/DSCN1557-nat-geog-1976_1200x900.JPG

National Geographic ... 1976.

There is simply nothing that makes this current warming trend stand out.

The climate pimps love to use the 1850-present time scale ... ignoring the fact that this represents a whopping 0.000004% of the Earth's climate history.

Another inconvenient truth brought to you by:

LWW

Chopstick
01-03-2011, 02:05 PM
I remember that chart. It used to be on the internet. When it disappeared from all over the internet I knew somebody was lying. The data used to be posted on the NASA Goddard website until the goremans made them take it down.

Sev
01-03-2011, 02:25 PM
The Bilderbergers are at the root of it.

LWW
01-03-2011, 04:17 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Chopstick</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I remember that chart. It used to be on the internet. When it disappeared from all over the internet I knew somebody was lying. The data used to be posted on the NASA Goddard website until the goremans made them take it down. </div></div>

Statists lie.

The first use of "SCIENCE" to cow the ignorant into obedience was the priesthood of ancient Egypt. They had just enough knowledge to predict the Nile's annual reversal to the day and to predict lunar eclipses.

They used this limited knowledge to dupe the naive and uneducated masses into believing they can control these things.

They same methods still work today.

LWW

cushioncrawler
01-03-2011, 07:12 PM
That article haz a few holes and errors.
We do now (2010) know what causes glaciations -- i am not sure what we knew in 1976.
The graff of the last 1000 yrs duznt really go with the other 2 graffs -- it refers mainly to a part of the northern hemisphere, not the whole globe -- hence uzing it for "global" warming (or cooling) iz fraught.
mac.

Qtec
01-04-2011, 01:51 AM
1974?

A top range computer in 1974.

http://www.chilton-computing.org.uk/gallery/ral/med/r17841m.jpg

I bet it lost.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Annual Report 1974
Computing Services

The only major hardware change made to the IBM System 195 Central Computer during 1974 was the addition in March of a <span style='font-size: 17pt'>third megabyte </span>of main core. </div></div>

LOL.

Q

LWW
01-04-2011, 03:17 AM
And ... ?

LWW

Chopstick
01-04-2011, 10:10 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body">And ... ?

LWW </div></div>

<span style="color: #000099">And, that's not a model 195. This is. Computers do not have telephones on the front panel.</span>
http://www-03.ibm.com/ibm/history/exhibits/mainframe/images/2423PH3195.jpg

LWW
01-04-2011, 01:48 PM
Don't bother him with reality.

LWW

Qtec
01-05-2011, 02:03 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">IBM 360/195 Playing Chess, November 1974 </div></div>
http://www.chilton-computing.org.uk/gallery/ral/med/r17841m.jpg
link (http://www.chilton-computing.org.uk/ca/literature/annual_reports/p010.htm)

Does it matter? my point was that things have changed since 1974.

Q

LWW
01-05-2011, 03:12 AM
And ... ?

Sir Isaac Newton figured out the motions of the planets with a quill pen.

What, other than attempting to duck the truth, is your point?

LWW

Qtec
01-05-2011, 03:21 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Sir Isaac Newton figured out the motions of the planets with a quill pen. </div></div>

Did he FK you brainless Moron.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> In astronomy,<span style='font-size: 20pt'> Kepler's laws give a description of the motion of planets around the Sun.</span>

Kepler's laws are:

1. The orbit of every planet is an ellipse with the Sun at one of the two foci.
2. A line joining a planet and the Sun sweeps out equal areas during equal intervals of time.[1]
3. The square of the orbital period of a planet is directly proportional to the cube of the semi-major axis of its orbit


Johannes Kepler published his first two laws in 1609, having found them by analyzing the astronomical observations of Tycho Brahe.[2] Kepler did not discover his third law until many years later, and it was published in 1619.[2]

<span style='font-size: 26pt'>Almost a century later,</span> Isaac Newton proved that relationships like Kepler's would apply exactly under certain ideal conditions approximately fulfilled in the solar system </div></div>


Centuries before that I remember some guy proved that the Earth revolved around the Sun and not the other way around. It cost him his life.

Q

Q

LWW
01-05-2011, 03:41 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Centuries before that I remember some guy proved that the Earth revolved around the Sun and not the other way around. It cost him his life.

Q

Q


</div></div>

It wasn't "centuries" ... but it was 144 years. He didn't prove it, he rediscovered it ... it was first figured out by Philolaus.

It didn't cost him his life either, but since you obviously believe he was persecuted for his rediscovery ... which he was ... let's review why and by who:

He was persecuted because the "OVERWHELMING CONSENSUS" of the scientific community at the time was using junk science to keep the ruling class happy ... and Copernicus was the squeaky wheel.

Thanks for again proving my point. See how easy it is to figure this stuff out when you think for yourself.

Science is not, and never has been, about consensus. Science is about being right. Nearly every great scientific discovery involved a lone, or small group of, thinker(s) who went against the consensus.

It's better to be right and stand alone than to be wrong and stand with the crowd.

LWW

Chopstick
01-05-2011, 07:52 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">IBM 360/195 Playing Chess, November 1974 </div></div>
http://www.chilton-computing.org.uk/gallery/ral/med/r17841m.jpg
link (http://www.chilton-computing.org.uk/ca/literature/annual_reports/p010.htm)

Does it matter? my point was that things have changed since 1974.

Q </div></div>

<span style="color: #000099">It's a fake in the picture. The picture I posted is from the IBM archive. None of them look anything like the one in this picture. Things have changed a lot since 2004. Two years in the computer world are like two hundred in the regular world.

The measurements that produced the graphs in the article above were not dependent on computing horsepower. There are the same today as they were back then. Ice cores for example. The point of showing the article is to highlight how all data that contradicts Gore's hockey stick graph has been removed from all websites. If you had not seen the data previously, as I have, of have a copy like this, you would never know about it.

That, more than anything convinced me that AGW was fake. They went to too much trouble to hide things like the temperature records in the graphs above.


</span>

LWW
01-06-2011, 03:51 AM
Read "1984" my friend.

The state had an entire, and quite massive, state agency which did nothing but constantly erase and rewrite "HISTORY" so that it didn't conflict with today's version of "TRUTH" as distributed by the state.

And, you are right, we are on the cusp of that reality ... and the Obamatrons are loving it.

FWIW ... if you read the book, please forward it the West Virginia library system so that someone there can read it.

LWW

LWW
01-06-2011, 03:54 AM
As another example, remember the famed "HOCKEY STICK" introduced by Mann and his cohorts? They had to completely remove the medieval warming period to make their "SCIENCE" correct.

Then of course we have the Goremons and their "HIDE THE DECLINE" emails.

LWW