Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > alt.astronomy > #273108
| From | Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> |
|---|---|
| References | <IvSdnbywPI3tJUnInZ2dnUU7-REAAAAA@giganews.com> <mr2fnr$u94$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
| Subject | Re: New method could improve atmospheric forecasts over months, decades, and could explain 'pause' in global warming |
| Message-ID | <6423342cd2285a3db97fe4d18253b02d@dizum.com> (permalink) |
| Date | 2015-08-20 06:17 +0200 |
| Newsgroups | alt.astronomy, alt.conspiracy, alt.usenet.kooks, sci.physics |
| Organization | dizum.com - The Internet Problem Provider |
Cross-posted to 4 groups.
Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>
gilber34, in <news:mr2fnr$u94$1@speranza.aioe.org> did thusly
jump head first into the wood chipper again:
> On 8/19/2015 12:10 PM, Sam Wormley wrote:
>> New method could improve atmospheric forecasts over months, decades, and
>> could explain 'pause' in global warming
Solar and orbital forcing, the same causes of every other
interglacial and glaciation period throughout earth's history,
explain the 18 year 10 month pause in "global warming" quite
nicely.
Out of the total 750 gigatons moving through the carbon cycle
each year, we produce only 29 gigatons. That is largely offset by
nature absorbing 18 gigatons more than it gives off. So we're
only adding 11 gigatons per year net. And nature will, naturally,
ramp up to absorb that, as it has done throughout earth's
history... if it hadn't, CO2 levels would have reached "runaway"
levels long before we ever came on the scene.
Anthropogenic CO2 contributes 1 ten millionth of one percent to
temperature forcing, as has been proven mathematically. And given
that the temperature forcing is negatively correlated with CO2
concentration due to the efficient re-emission to space of
infrared by CO2, as CO2 levels rise, temperature drops will
become more severe on the night side of the planet, just as
happens on Mars.
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tDGgGttVvk4>
>>> http://phys.org/news/2015-08-method-atmospheric-months-decades-global.html
>>> In a new paper published online in Geophysical Research Letters,
>>> Lovejoy shows how to directly harness the atmosphere's elephantine
>>> memory to produce temperature forecasts that are somewhat more
>>> accurate than conventional numerical computer models. This new
>>> method, he says, could help improve notoriously poor seasonal
>>> forecasts, as well as producing better long-term climate
>>> projections.
> so 97% of Climate Scientist Admit they used Flawed Computer Programs to
> generate Global Worming
No. Climate change whackadoodles lie. *And* they use flawed
computer programs to generate alarmist global warming propaganda.
Message-ID: <8f8bdad9840a40c99b0afe28d0a2055c@dizum.com>
Klimate Katastrophe Kook K'lame #4: 97% of climate experts agree
humans are causing global warming
SPNAK! #4
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The "97% of climate scientists agree" is an outright lie:
Message-ID: <c407c7d08fb6911ec5f4f90971e41c78@dizum.com>
=========================================================
The LibTard environmental whackadoodles keep bleating about "97%
of climate scientists agree that global warming is human
caused!".
Where did this 97% figure come from?
When you explore its lineage, it turns out to be about as
convincing as a Chicago election. The most prominent form of it
comes from a professor in Australia named John Cook at the
University of Queensland.
What Cook's study purported to do was to review the abstracts
(not the entire papers, just the abstracts) of 11,000 climate
science articles.
But when you read the first paragraph of Cook's abstract for his
study, it says, "We find that 66.4% of abstracts expressed no
position on anthropogenic global warming, 32.6% endorsed
anthropogenic global warming, 0.7% rejected it, and 0.3% were
uncertain."
That means only 1/3 of those papers had an opinion on
human-caused global warming. The next sentence in Cook's abstract
for his study says, "Among abstracts expressing a position on
human-caused global warming, 97.1% endorsed the consensus
position that humans are causing the warming."
11000 * .326 = 3586 * .971 = 3482
(3482 / 11000) * 100 = 31.65% of climate scientists agree that
global warming is human-caused. And those 31.65% aren't even all
"climate scientists"... a good majority of them are research
assistants and college students who write the (non-peer reviewed)
papers that the lead researchers (mainly associated with the IPCC
and other politicized "scientific" entities) put their names on.
But then, LibTard environmental whackadoodles are gullible and
stupid... they can't pull their heads out of liberalism's ass
long enough to do their own research, and even if they could,
that hard math eludes them.
=========================================================
>>> Improvement on standard approach
>>> To take advantage of the butterfly effect, Lovejoy's approach treats
>>> the weather as random and uses historical data to force the forecast
>>> to reflect a realistic climate. This allows it to overcome
>>> limitations of the standard approach, in which imperfect
>>> representations of the weather push a computer model to be consistent
>>> with its model climate - rather than with the real climate.
> Admission that Climate Models Fail to be consistant with real Climate.
Klimate Katastrophe Kook K'lame #1: Climate reacts to whatever
forces it to change at the time; humans are now the dominant
forcing
SPNAK! #1
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Not according to a former IPCC lead author.
Message-ID: <71581f83f38e08d06eae2b440227d0ff@dizum.com>
<http://dailycaller.com/2015/05/22/former-un-lead-author-global-warming-caused-by-natural-variations-in-climate/>
<http://multi-science.atypon.com/doi/abs/10.1260/0958-305X.26.3.417>
<http://multi-science.atypon.com/doi/pdf/10.1260/0958-305X.26.3.417>
=================================================
Global temperature change observed over the last hundred years or
so is well within the natural variability of the last 8,000
years, according to a new paper by a former Intergovernmental
Panel On Climate Change (IPCC) lead author.
Dr. Philip Lloyd, a South Africa-based physicist and climate
researcher, examined ice core-based temperature data going back
8,000 years to gain perspective on the magnitude of global
temperature changes over the 20th Century.
What Lloyd found was that the standard deviation of the
temperature over the last 8,000 years was about 0.98 degrees
Celsius - higher than the 0.85 degrees climate scientists say the
world has warmed over the last century.
"This suggests that while some portion of the temperature change
observed in the 20th century was probably caused by greenhouse
gases, there is a strong likelihood that the major portion was
due to natural variations", Lloyd wrote in his study.
But even surface temperature data showed a hiatus in warming for
about 15 years or so. Scientists have offered up dozens of
explanations for why global temperatures have been flat since the
late 1990s. The most prominent explanation is that oceans have
been absorbing most of the "heat" from increased greenhouse gas
emissions, meaning surface temperatures show less warming than
they otherwise would.
=================================================
{NOTE: That's entirely untrue. NASA JPL itself did the research
and determined that ocean temperature at depth had not changed
one iota.
<http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2014/06oct_abyss/>
<http://iceagenow.info/2014/10/nasa-stumped-deep-oceans-warmed-2005/>
"When scientists at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) in
Pasadena, California, analyzed satellite and direct ocean
temperature data from 2005 to 2013, they found that "the ocean
abyss below 1.24 miles (1,995 meters) has not warmed measurably",
the space agency announced in a press release on Monday.
=================================================
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The *only* "global warming" is that which resides in those flawed
computer climate models the libtard environmental whackadoodles
keep trying to sell.
>>> The new method also represents an improvement over other statistical
>>> forecasting techniques that exploit only the atmosphere's short-term
>>> memory, Lovejoy asserts.
>>>
>>> Lovejoy's paper uses a simple version of his new method to show that
>>> the so-called pause in global warming since 1998 can be well
>>> explained with the help of historical atmospheric data. He also
>>> concludes that this method proves more accurate over this period than
>>> the standard computer models used, for example, by the International
>>> Panel on Climate Change.
> which is deeply flawed
Klimate Katastrophe Kook K'lame #5: The last decade 2000-2009 was
the hottest on record.
SPNAK! #5
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Another blatant lie.
=========================================================
Message-ID: <15ce479ee9f780168fcff750b5b112a8@dizum.com>
Message-ID: <08866ced31c10d3747efb9bf43b3d981@dizum.com>
Message-ID: <0b42119ce54a8e54585eabda09d60ae6@dizum.com>
Message-ID: <460825f8b0e76514eae0c7d9ffb79558@dizum.com>
===============================================================
Taken from the hacked ClimateGate 2.0 emails:
"Observations do not show rising temperatures throughout the
tropical troposphere unless you accept one single study and
discount a wealth of others. This is just downright dangerous. We
need to communicate the uncertainty and be honest.", writes Peter
Thorne of the UK Met Office, "I also think the science is being
manipulated to put a political spin on it which for all our sakes
might not be too clever in the long run", Thorne adds.
<http://www.reportingclimatescience.com/news-stories/article/global-warming-pause-hits-18-years-on-rss-data.html>
Using UK Met, UAH and RSS data.
Page 11 - Global temperature rate (C per year): dropping since
~1998. *Negative* since ~2005. That means temps have been
dropping for ~17 years, and the gullible LibTarDs have been lied
to for ~17 years:
<http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/media/pdf/e/f/Paper1_Observing_changes_in_the_climate_system.PDF>
Message-ID: <b41f4a8054430ac46092e607919d7063@dizum.com>
Even NASA admitted that global temperatures were falling in
recent years (before they pulled that page... luckily the WayBack
Machine archived it):
<http://web.archive.org/web/20030816225534/http://icp.giss.nasa.gov/research/methane/greenhouse.html>
Note the center trace for modern times in that graphic...
*falling* temperature, even as CO2 and methane rose.
===============================================================
>>> Lovejoy's model also predicts that if greenhouse gas emissions
>>> continue at the post 2000 rate, there is a 97.5% chance that the
>>> "pause" in global warming will be over before 2020.
>>>
>>> Read more at:
>>> http://phys.org/news/2015-08-method-atmospheric-months-decades-global.html#jCp
"Global warming" or "anthropocentric climate change" or
"anthropogenic climate disruption" or whatever the Klimate
Katastrophe Kooks are calling it now in trying to sell bull shit
as steak is nothing but a politicized scam... even the "climate
scientists" flogging the "global warming" scam know it...
===============================================================
Taken from the hacked ClimateGate 1.0 and ClimateGate 2.0 emails:
<http://tomnelson.blogspot.com/2012/01/email-4141-glimpse-into-climate-science.html>
"I think the notion of telling the public to prepare for both
global warming and an ice age at the same time creates a real
public relations problem for us."
- Asher Minns, "climate scientist" from scandal-rocked
University of East Anglia, letting the cat completely out of the
bag.
The "climate scientists" know an ice age is coming... but their
paymasters are telling them to flog global warming so those
politicians can set up their carbon exchanges. The politicians
will be ground floor investors in those carbon exchanges, which
will increase the cost of living for everyone by hundreds of
billions of dollars per year (remember Obama saying "electricity
rates would necessarily skyrocket"? Yeah. Because the politicians
would force the utilities to line the pockets of the politicians
via the carbon exchange tax, and the utilities would pass that
cost on to the consumers.)... all so those politicians can reap
hundreds of millions of dollars per year in profits selling a
solution that does nothing to solve a problem that doesn't exist.
Anthropogenic global warming is a politicized scam, nothing more.
===============================================================
Message-ID: <b0d12057982df5cafade09fac73454fd@dizum.com>
===============================================================
This is further borne out by the fact that the Antarctic ice
sheet has been adding 49 Gt / year of land ice (and the sea ice
is expanding faster than ever) since 2003, per Nasa's ICEsat,
despite liberal whackadoodles k'laming it's losing ice at an
unprecedented rate:
Message-ID: <b5b82a4693774b84e8c96c06910bfb2e@dizum.com>
This is borne out by the length of the Arctic melting season
declining for the past 5 years, according to sidads.colorado.edu:
http://oi45.tinypic.com/27yr1wy.jpg
This is borne out by the fact that the "Annoying Lead Time
Indicator" graph shows temperature trending downward:
http://chiefio.wordpress.com/2012/12/29/annoying-lead-time-graph/#comment-44336
"Both the Greenland and the Antarctica temperatures are lower
than their peaks. They are generally trending downward overall.
Antarctica in particular lead on the way up, and is lower than
Greenland now. Furthermore, we know that right now ice is
accumulating in Antarctica. Greenland is the tail on the
Antarctic dog... And our W/m2 line is continuing in a decent
downward slope. Harder to see in that Milankovitch Cycles
composite graph. (Inspecting it, I was hoping we were already AT
the bottom. We are not.) So we have a bit more drop in W/m2
before we start back up, and we are below the energy level that
pulls us out of a glacial, once one begins. All in all, this
graph tells me that we are on the knife edge of a drop into a
cold stage and acceleration into a glacial stage, from which we
can not recover. (This is, in some ways, just a confirmation of
the 416 W/m2 or so number from prior plunges – but on a graph
showing that our drop in W/m2 is not yet done dropping.)"
This is borne out by the fact that Alaska has overall cooled by
2.4 F since 2000:
http://www.alaskadispatch.com/article/forget-global-warming-alaska-headed-ice-age
You'll note that the "global temperatures surge hotter and the
ice-cap crumbles" quote was due to scientists falsifying data.
Observation of these phenomena proves that global temperatures
are falling, and ice caps are adding ice.
This is borne out by the fact that we've had a 90 year *cooling*
trend that the climate change scientists got caught trying to
falsify data to make it appear as though it were a warming trend:
Message-ID: <2c1ef34505cceac90d11237317727e33@dizum.com>
This is borne out by the fact that there have been 129
climate-related scandals to date, from outright falsification of
data to unintentional data errors that were left intact because
their removal would put truth to the climate change alarmist's
lies:
http://notrickszone.com/climate-scandals/
Ironically, while a certain astronomical scientist demands
peer-reviewed scientific literature (then ignores it when it is
provided), the IPCC's errors stem primarily from reliance upon
non-peer reviewed sources for their data, making it all too easy
for climate change alarmists to use the IPCC as a platform for
advancing their agenda. Of course, the IPCC has the same agenda,
so those using it for that purpose are never called to account.
And of course, the scientific research that absolutely blows out
of the water the notion that CO2 is the cause of global warming
is the *fact* that CO2 follows solar and orbital-forcing induced
global warming by 600 to 1000 years, as even SkepticalScience.com
admits.
Message-ID: <2c1ef34505cceac90d11237317727e33@dizum.com>
And of course, the climate change alarmists are loath to remind
anyone that changes in temperature measurement methods was what
introduced errors that led to the IPCC (and hence the US EPA)
declaring anthropogenic global warming in the first place, but
when the necessary corrective factors are applied to the data,
their claim of anthropogenic temperature increases is severely
reduced. That, combined with the observed increase in
stratospheric water vapor content (remember, water vapor is a
*much* larger contributor to greenhouse warming than CO2), wipes
out even more of the IPCC's claim of AGW.:
http://www.masterresource.org/2010/02/why-the-epa-is-wrong-about-recent-warming
In fact, the man who started the 1970's "ice age" scare, and who
was instrumental in advancing the current "global warming" scare,
NASA scientist James Hansen, has said in 1999:
http://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/briefs/hansen_07/
"Yet in the U.S. there has been little temperature change in the
past 50 years, the time of rapidly increasing greenhouse gases —
in fact, there was a slight cooling throughout much of the
country."
(You will note that it was none other than James Hansen who later
lied and claimed 1998 to be the warmest year on record.)
Well there you go... one of NASA's own scientists and currently
one of the largest proponents of the AGW scaremongering,
admitting that from 1940 onward to 1999, temperature actually
went down... but he changed his tune after the global warming
scare mongers changed the data so that the heat wave of the
1930's (remember 1934's record breaking heat wave and dust bowl,
anyone?) appeared to be *less* than 1998 temperatures (remember
1998's dust bowl, anyone? No? Hmmm. That's because it was merely
an El Nino year, and the Heat Index was much lower than that in
1934.), thereby making it appear as though anthropogenic global
warming was taking place.
http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-London/2014/06/23/Global-warming-Fabricated-by-NASA-and-NOAA
http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2014/06/23/noaanasa-dramatically-altered-us-temperatures-after-the-year-2000/
Of course, we now know the lack of a warming trend in the US was
due to accurate measurement of temperature, said data being
changed later, whereas other countries (notably Europe) were
fudging the numbers long before US scientists... the US
politicians finally caught onto the game around 2000, and
colluded with the climate scientists to change the US data to
start their own scare-mongering / profit scamming.
So what we've got here is a bunch of scientists led by the nose
because they wanted to continue receiving research grants,
getting caught falsifying data so they could please those giving
them those grants, all driven by corrupt liberal politicians who
were attempting to commit the world's largest-ever con game on
humanity. That falsified data was going to be used by certain
politicians to set up "carbon exchanges" from which they would
have reaped billions of dollars in profits. A secondary purpose
of this politician-led global warming scam is as an instrument of
authority to impose public policy that the politicians know
they'd have no chance of otherwise imposing upon the populace.
Had they believed their own hype, Al Gore wouldn't be living in a
veritable mansion that's 4 times larger than surrounding homes
and which used 12 times more energy than surrounding homes, and
which was only able to lower its energy consumption by 11% after
extensive renovation and "greening". According to Snopes, most
homes used 20% to 30% more electricity during the 2009 summer
than Gore's home... but only because Gore was almost never home,
he was jetting around the world to give speeches, and pumping
more greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere than the next 100
people combined.
So the truth has been revealed, and the con game is collapsing
before their eyes.
And for certain liberal whackadoodle astronomical scientists
who've been 180 degrees out on every single thing they've
k'lamed, it's just one more example of why liberalism is a mental
disease that combines equal parts unquestioning gullibility,
fawning deference to so-called "experts", dismissal of any
evidence that refutes their kooky worldview, and disingenuous
alteration of any evidence they think they can get away with
altering to "prove" their point.
At the rate scientists are going, it wouldn't surprise me if
their credibility were soon less than that of Congresscritters.
SPNAK!
--
Kensi snipped out any evidence that proved her wrong then
demanded that evidence again and again, only to snip it out
again; she denied having written what she clearly wrote (after
she snipped it out, of course); she k'lamed that I'd written
things I clearly didn't (and she failed to back up her k'lames
with proof); she stated that zoanthropy and transexualism aren't
mental illnesses (they are listed in the DSM); that the
psychiatric community is incorrect for listing them as such by
taking an example from nearly 100 years ago (hysteria), long
before modern psychiatry got a grasp on what exactly constitutes
a mental illness; she stated that the CDC is promulgating "FUD"
that's "been debunked in thousands of places" (yet provided no
proof of this k'lamed "debunking"); she's been cornered into
admitting her belief that gays have suffered "no harm" in living
a lifestyle that's given 19% of them AIDS, causes the gay
community to account for 63% of new AIDS cases per year (per the
CDC) and kills thousands of them per year; she stated that
liberalism is growing when it's actually in decline (and stated
that conservatism is dying when it's actually growing and has a
nearly 2:1 advantage over liberalism), and she had the audacity
to try to use the same exact study from Gallup that I'd used to
prove her wrong in the first place (proving she's kooking out so
badly she's lost her reading comprehension abilities); she stated
the Antarctic ice sheets are shrinking faster than ever when
they're growing (to the tune of 49 Gt/yr, when considering that
land ice is slowly growing and sea ice is rapidly expanding, per
Nasa's ICESat); she stated that global temperature is rising when
it's been falling for more than a decade per the UK Met and NASA,
and accounting for the revelations that US climate researchers
outright falsified the data to give the impression that a 90 year
cooling trend was actually a warming trend; she k'lamed CO2 as
the driver for global temperature change, then quoted a web page
that says the exact opposite (the same web page, BTW, that I'd
used to prove that CO2 lags temperature change, proving yet again
her loss of reading comprehension)... then she *admitted* CO2
lags global temperature change, thereby being forced to agree
with me (and reality); she then k'lamed CO2 as the driver for
global temperature change *again*, but as yet has been unable to
explain, given that CO2 levels were 5 times higher in the
Ordovician and sun output was nearly the same (0.991 Ordovician,
1 today), why we're not in a perpetual ice age today; she
presented examples of mass-shooting suspects that she k'lamed
were conservative (but they turned out to be liberal, socialist
or were the result of a liberal upbringing); she tried to state
that Nazism was a conservative political party (it's a form of
liberal fascism that takes many of its tenets directly from
socialism); she failed to provide any proof of some of her kooky
contentions while k'laming them as "proof"; she used a flawed and
biased dating website poll and k'lamed that it trumped an actual
scientific study (ironic, given that she's a scientist herself);
she melted down so badly she lost her ability to do simple math;
she attempted to k'lame Abraham Lincoln was a liberal (he
admitted he was a conservative); she attempted to k'lame that
every major civil rights advancement was solely due to liberals
(when it was conservatives who've advanced the overwhelming
majority of civil rights bills, to the strident opposition of the
liberals), she k'lamed she knows who I am due to her "kookology
experience", "profound psychological insight" and "cryptanalysis
skills", yet she's thus far run from five challenges to out me,
for 391 days and counting (ie: she doesn't dare provide any of
her so-called "proof", for fear that she outs the fact that she's
kooking out and seeing me everywhere), and her loss of reading
comprehension skills resulted in her apparent loss of being able
to determine chronology. As the level of spankage she was
receiving escalated, the time between her posts grew, and the
length of her posts grew shorter as she snipped out more and more
evidence that she's a delusional kook... she's been beating a
strategic retreat for months now.... when she's not
attention-whoring for all the boys because her make-believe
husband isn't paying enough attention to her fat, ugly,
delusional ass anymore. LOL
Back to alt.astronomy | Previous | Next — Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: New method could improve atmospheric forecasts over months, decades, and could explain 'pause' in global warming Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-20 06:17 +0200
Re: New method could improve atmospheric forecasts over months, decades, and could explain 'pause' in global warming benj <nobody@gmail.com> - 2015-08-20 01:05 -0400
Re: New method could improve atmospheric forecasts over months, decades, and could explain 'pause' in global warming "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2015-08-20 03:08 -0400
Re: New method could improve atmospheric forecasts over months, decades, and could explain 'pause' in global warming Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-20 17:56 +0200
Re: New method could improve atmospheric forecasts over months, decades, and could explain 'pause' in global warming "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2015-08-20 03:04 -0400
Re: New method could improve atmospheric forecasts over months, decades, and could explain 'pause' in global warming Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-20 18:13 +0200
Re: New method could improve atmospheric forecasts over months, decades, and could explain 'pause' in global warming "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2015-08-21 00:15 -0400
Re: New method could improve atmospheric forecasts over months, decades, and could explain 'pause' in global warming Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-21 19:23 +0200
Re: New method could improve atmospheric forecasts over months, decades, and could explain 'pause' in global warming "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2015-08-22 12:03 -0400
Re: New method could improve atmospheric forecasts over months, decades, and could explain 'pause' in global warming Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-22 18:57 +0200
Re: New method could improve atmospheric forecasts over months, decades, and could explain 'pause' in global warming "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2015-08-22 15:09 -0400
Re: New method could improve atmospheric forecasts over months, decades, and could explain 'pause' in global warming Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-22 22:14 +0200
Re: New method could improve atmospheric forecasts over months, decades, and could explain 'pause' in global warming gilber34 <invalid@invalid.com> - 2015-08-22 16:32 -0500
Re: New method could improve atmospheric forecasts over months, decades, and could explain 'pause' in global warming Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-23 01:26 +0200
Re: New method could improve atmospheric forecasts over months, decades, and could explain 'pause' in global warming "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2015-08-23 04:01 -0400
Re: New method could improve atmospheric forecasts over months, decades, and could explain 'pause' in global warming Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-23 17:48 +0200
Re: New method could improve atmospheric forecasts over months, decades, and could explain 'pause' in global warming Jed Clampett <jc@invalid.invalid> - 2015-08-22 01:40 -0700
Re: New method could improve atmospheric forecasts over months, decades, and could explain 'pause' in global warming Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-22 18:16 +0200
Re: New method could improve atmospheric forecasts over months, decades, and could explain 'pause' in global warming Jed Clampett <jc@invalid.invalid> - 2015-08-23 12:55 -0700
Re: New method could improve atmospheric forecasts over months, decades, and could explain 'pause' in global warming Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-24 01:59 +0200
Re: New method could improve atmospheric forecasts over months, decades, and could explain 'pause' in global warming "Kadaitcha Man" <nospam.nospam.nospam@alt.astronomy.fart-acceptance> - 2015-08-21 08:31 +0000
Re: New method could improve atmospheric forecasts over months, decades, and could explain 'pause' in global warming Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-20 19:10 +0200
Re: New method could improve atmospheric forecasts over months, decades, and could explain 'pause' in global warming МалыШ <oppressed.welly-boot.top@melancholy.yum.yum> - 2015-08-22 07:00 +0000
Re: New method could improve atmospheric forecasts over months, decades, and could explain 'pause' in global warming Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-21 20:53 +0200
Re: New method could improve atmospheric forecasts over months, decades, and could explain 'pause' in global warming "Kadaitcha Man" <nospam.nospam.nospam@alabama.clay.colored.stools> - 2015-08-22 22:31 +0000
Re: New method could improve atmospheric forecasts over months, decades, and could explain 'pause' in global warming Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-22 06:17 +0200
Re: New method could improve atmospheric forecasts over months, decades, and could explain 'pause' in global warming "Akhen-f-eshef" <two.bit.altar.of.love@floppy.penis.penitentiary> - 2015-08-23 08:19 +0000
Re: New method could improve atmospheric forecasts over months, decades, and could explain 'pause' in global warming Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-22 19:44 +0200
Re: New method could improve atmospheric forecasts over months, decades, and could explain 'pause' in global warming "Jackson Fashshaw-Pofway" <cracked.up.cooze@creaky.peach.fish> - 2015-08-23 23:22 +0000
Re: New method could improve atmospheric forecasts over months, decades, and could explain 'pause' in global warming Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-23 04:12 +0200
Re: New method could improve atmospheric forecasts over months, decades, and could explain 'pause' in global warming "Cedric Fenningstone-Chistway" <dried-up.peeper@incomplete.penis.penitentiary> - 2015-08-24 03:03 +0000
Re: New method could improve atmospheric forecasts over months, decades, and could explain 'pause' in global warming Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-23 06:47 +0200
Re: New method could improve atmospheric forecasts over months, decades, and could explain 'pause' in global warming "Kadaitcha Man" <nospam.nospam.nospam@alt.christnet.party-girls> - 2015-08-25 04:00 +0000
Re: New method could improve atmospheric forecasts over months, decades, and could explain 'pause' in global warming Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2015-08-23 21:21 +0200
Re: New method could improve atmospheric forecasts over months, decades, and could explain 'pause' in global warming "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2015-08-24 13:23 -0400
Re: New method could improve atmospheric forecasts over months, decades, and could explain 'pause' in global warming "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2015-08-20 18:41 -0400
csiph-web