Climate Hoax

[Lipdrag]

15 hours ago, ionel said:

So you are thinking not biodegradable?  

Replace them with that same material they use for paper straws.

[Scouts Honor]

On 8/9/2026 at 4:20 PM, red viking said:

Anonymous data is thrown out in all fields. Happens in u.s. too and the reasons are well documented and explained at NOAAs website and other places. None of this changes the fact that earth is clearly warming and its anthropogenic. Theres zero doubt about it. 

lol

b/c i say so 

[Scouts Honor]

On 8/9/2026 at 5:17 PM, red viking said:

I'm not the one publishing the trends and conclusions but a little science background helps me understand it. Instead of listening to winger anti science conspiracy bs like u idiots  

but i bet you help pay those who are fudgin that data

[Offthemat]

The true data shows that temperatures are not getting hotter, they are getting more moderate. 

[red viking]

11 minutes ago, Offthemat said:

The true data shows that temperatures are not getting hotter, they are getting more moderate. 

I assume you're joking. Even most of the most extreme idiots admit that the temps are getting hotter, on average, globally. They're just too stupid too understand how its very obvious that its almost all or all anthropogenic. 

[ionel]

3 minutes ago, red viking said:

I assume you're joking. Even most of the most extreme idiots admit that the temps are getting hotter, on average, globally. They're just too stupid too understand how its very obvious that its almost all or all anthropogenic. 

So its no longer climate change?  

[Offthemat]

On average?  It’s either hotter or it’s not.  The temperatures were hotter in the 1930s than they are now.  Winters and nights are a little warmer than they have been in the recent past, but we are not experiencing the highest temperatures.  
 

On average.  Pfffft!

[red viking]

7 minutes ago, Offthemat said:

On average?  It’s either hotter or it’s not.  The temperatures were hotter in the 1930s than they are now.  Winters and nights are a little warmer than they have been in the recent past, but we are not experiencing the highest temperatures.  
 

On average.  Pfffft!

On average, yes. That's why it's called GLOBAL warming. Specific locations can vary more temporally than global temps. 

You're 110% wrong about the 1930s. Several local records were broken in the 1930s, in the United States. Actual data proves that global temps were NOT as warm as they've been the past several years. 

You need to get our of your myopic "United States is the center of the universe" mentality. 

This is VERY BASIC climatology. You really should just take a very basic climatology class before you say such stupid stuff. 

Where do you get your stupid ideas from re: climatology? Twitter or some BS like that? 

Edited August 11 by red viking

[Offthemat]

Gov’t data. 

[red viking]

Just now, Offthemat said:

Gov’t data. 

You're a lying sack of garbage. All you probably did was look at high temp records in the U.S., which is the most ignorant way possible to make conclusions about global warming or cooling. 

[Offthemat]

On average, you’re a Po lying S. 

[Bigbrog]

Hey RV, when you say the average historical global temp is rising..from when?  What is the timeframe you are claiming..I.e. start to current 

[red viking]

32 minutes ago, Bigbrog said:

Hey RV, when you say the average historical global temp is rising..from when?  What is the timeframe you are claiming..I.e. start to current 

Overall since beginning of widespread burning of fossil fuels. There isnt an exact year for that because fossil fuel burning has accelerated over time but over several decades at a minimum. Rapid temp increases over past several decades whether u go back to 1970s, 1940s or 1900. The overall conclusion won't change. 

Edited August 11 by red viking

[Bigbrog]

8 minutes ago, red viking said:

Overall since beginning of widespread burning of fossil fuels. There isnt an exact year for that because fossil fuel burning has accelerated over time but over several decades at a minimum. Rapid temp increases over past several decades whether u go back to 1970s, 1940s or 1900. The overall conclusion won't change. 

If you include the whole data set it absolutely will change. That is the problem I have with some of the so called climatologist is one can pick and choose their own start date to show whatever they want it to show. But if they used the whole data set their claims fall apart real fast. I'm not saying, and have said this before, humans don't have an impact on the environment because we do but it isn't to the extent the alarmist like you claim it is. 

By the way I've personally never met a scientist that chooses to limit a data set when doing an analysis such as global temp variations over time.  

[red viking]

3 minutes ago, Bigbrog said:

If you include the whole data set it absolutely will change. 

The exact amount will change but its significant warming either way. And yes, its pretty much all because of man. Climatologists can easily account for other factors, which happen over geologic timescales (unlike what we've been observing more recently which is much more rapid) 

[ionel]

2 hours ago, Bigbrog said:

Hey RV, when you say the average historical global temp is rising..from when?  What is the timeframe you are claiming..I.e. start to current 

You are asking the wrong guy ... he doesn't have a PhD. 

[red viking]

1 hour ago, ionel said:

You are asking the wrong guy ... he doesn't have a PhD. 

Follow your own advice and read what PhDs have to say instead of BS conspiracy theories on twitter from people that aren't even climatologists and based upon crap science that really shouldn't even fool a high schooler. 

[ionel]

3 minutes ago, red viking said:

Follow your own advice and read what PhDs have to say instead of BS conspiracy theories on twitter from people that aren't even climatologists and based upon crap science that really shouldn't even fool a high schooler. 

I've never done twitter and pretty sure it no longer exists.   Also I've been in meetings with PhD Climatologists so know how to find their papers and don't need to hear it from a rock.  

[red viking]

1 hour ago, ionel said:

Also I've been in meetings with PhD Climatologists so know how to find their papers...

Good. Then read up on it or ask them about it. Maybe explain your theories to them. I'd love to see that. 

[Bigbrog]

15 hours ago, red viking said:

Follow your own advice and read what PhDs have to say instead of BS conspiracy theories on twitter from people that aren't even climatologists and based upon crap science that really shouldn't even fool a high schooler. 

Glad you confirmed we shouldn't listen to or believe anything you have to say on the subject. 

But guess what...no one on here ever did believe you...on any topic...that is 110% guaranteed

[red viking]

10 minutes ago, Bigbrog said:

Glad you confirmed we shouldn't listen to or believe anything you have to say on the subject. 

But guess what...no one on here ever did believe you...on any topic...that is 110% guaranteed

Anybody that relies on this forum to get their news is an idiot. Or any social media for that matter. 

Yes; read what the PhD climatologists have to say on the matter. 

BTW, I did teach college earth science though so I'm not the worst source of info out there, if you just want the basics. And this forum is VERY BASIC when it comes to science matters. 

Edited August 12 by red viking

[Offthemat]

Northern Europe has been sweltering under a heat wave, and naturally global warming alarmists are out in force. Thus, in the London Times: “Where are all those climate sceptics now?” News reports consistently say that this summer’s temperatures are the highest ever.

Is that true? Not really:

“Europe’s heatwave is the hottest and most humid ever” – New Scientist article headline
***
In 2014,  Wetter et al published a paper: The year-long unprecedented European heat and drought of 1540 – a worst case. Admittedly the paper was comparing the megadrought of 1540 with the European and Russian droughts of 2003 and 2010, but it is hard to believe from their description that the current European drought is any worse. It is also very hard to believe that the current European drought is so much worse than the 1540 megadrought that it is evidence of a man-made existential threat. And it is extremely hard to believe that any media outlet has carefully checked the reported 1540 heat and drought against the 2026 heat and drought to make sure that their use of “unprecedented”, “worst ever” etc is accurate. 

Weather

 

From the abstract:

The heat waves of 2003 in Western Europe and 2010 in Russia, commonly labelled as rare climatic anomalies outside of previous experience, are often taken as harbingers of more frequent extremes in the global warming-influenced future. However, a recent reconstruction of spring–summer temperatures for WE resulted in the likelihood of significantly higher temperatures in 1540. In order to check the plausibility of this result we investigated the severity of the 1540 drought by putting forward the argument of the known soil desiccation-temperature feedback. Based on more than 300 first-hand documentary  weather report sources originating from an area of 2 to 3 million km2, we show that Europe was affected by an unprecedented 11-month-long Megadrought. The estimated number of precipitation days and precipitation amount for Central and Western Europe in 1540 is significantly lower than the 100-year minima of the instrumental measurement period for spring, summer and autumn. This result is supported by independent documentary evidence about extremely low river flows and Europe-wide wild-, forest- and settlement fires. We found that an event of this severity cannot be simulated by state-of-the-art climate models.…

As long as we are on the subject of climate news, let’s applaud the record growth of the Great Barrier Reef. Liberals are gnashing their teeth, or they were in 2014, anyway:
 

Sadly for liberals, the reef is now bigger than ever (as far as we know) before. Have you ever noticed that liberals never, ever express happiness about good environmental news? It is almost as though they are hoping for environmental disaster:

Bjorn Lomborg asks a good question: why, after all the wailing over the supposedly impending demise of the Great Barrier Reef, are we not seeing news stories about the reef’s apparently unprecedented growth? 

https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2026/08/heat-wave-2.php

[Scouts Honor]

On 8/11/2026 at 12:14 PM, red viking said:

You're a lying sack of garbage. All you probably did was look at high temp records in the U.S., which is the most ignorant way possible to make conclusions about global warming or cooling. 

you think that some scientist just made some data out of the goodness of their heart? 

someone paid them... to say something.

it actually was proven a few years ago, that scientists were fudging data.

[Scouts Honor]

the only reason Mann 'won' his suit was that he was worried about being called a pedo.

not that he fudged his data 

[red viking]

3 hours ago, Scouts Honor said:

you think that some scientist just made some data out of the goodness of their heart? 

someone paid them... to say something.

it actually was proven a few years ago, that scientists were fudging data.

There's exactly zero evidence of a systematic and worldwide effort to fudge historical climate data to make it look as though global warming is occurring. It would also be difficult because there are temperature stations all over the world that independently reported data over the past hundred years or whatever. There would literally have to be tends thousands of people or more in on this and keeping it a secret. 

This is almost as dumb as the flat earth or fake moon landing theories. The stuff I see from the wingers becomes more and more unbelievable every year.