Hansen Wants To Be A Real Boy

“Global temperature is rising as fast in the past decade as in the prior two decades, despite year-to-year fluctuations associated with the El Niño-La Niña cycle of tropical ocean temperature,” Hansen and colleagues reported

http://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/news/20110112/

http://www.woodfortrees.org/

Advertisements

About stevengoddard

Just having fun
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

35 Responses to Hansen Wants To Be A Real Boy

  1. Andy Weiss says:

    Have Hansen’s lies been peer reviewed?

    • Mike Davis says:

      It depends on which color you are asking about. The color of the fabricated claim provides evidence to which group of peers reviewed the claim. I have a grant proposal in for funding to study and identify “ALL” of the colors of Big Jim’s created claims. Some appear to be contradictory with others but if you realize that a white can not be compared to a green or even a blue. With our latest model we should have some preliminary results within 2 years and we should be able to publish in time to be included in AR6.
      The main problem is the Chaotic nature of the study subject!

  2. MikeTheDenier says:

    OT but too rich to ignore….

    Why is Chris Matthews Displaying A Target and Crosshairs on the U.S. Capitol?

    http://www.hapblog.com/2011/01/why-is-chris-matthews-displaying-target.html

  3. Kelathos says:

    Down is the new up, at least in climate science.

  4. sunsettommy says:

    TonyD:

    “kudos to you!
    glad to see you are putting this stuff together for publication.”

    Not necessary.We already have Dr. Hansen’s presentations.To use against him.

    We have exposed him several times now,manipulating the GISS temperature data.It has been shown many times.

    You are as usual late to the party of comprehension.

    • Tony Duncan says:

      Sunset,

      being late to the party doesn’t matter if the party is only on right wing blogs! What matters is peer reviewed science and legally proving fraud.

    • Cthulhu says:

      you’ve exposed nothing, Hansen is walking all over you guys. Because he’s right. And you are wrong. Just scroll up above and watch as Steve Goddard tests one of Hansen’s claims about GISTEMP by graphing HadCRUT.

      omfg.

      • You got me this time. Yes, I used independent verification from a more reliable source. Not acceptable in Hansen’s world or climate science in general.

      • Cthulhu says:

        yes because if someone makes a claim from their work and it doesn’t match someone elses work, therefore they are a liar.

        Maybe if you had read Hansen’s paper instead of searching youtube for disney cartoons you would have learned something.

        • In most fields of science people take note when their work disagrees with others – and report that finding.

          Hansen goes straight to the press and reports the hottest year ever, even though his claim is in direct contradiction to others. The fact that you are sticking up for him is very telling.

      • Tony Duncan says:

        Isn;t the CRU part of hadcrut the same people that were shown in the climategate emails to be part of the global warming conspiracy?

      • Dave G says:

        Wow Steve, must be Mother Nature forgot to read Hansen’s papers, maybe I wouldn’t be trying to cool down in this -15F heat and white rain

      • Paul H says:

        “Isn;t the CRU part of hadcrut the same people that were shown in the climategate emails to be part of the global warming conspiracy”

        Perhaps Jones is being more careful now our watchful eyes are on him, Tony.

        On a more serious note, there has been a growing divergence between GISS and HADCRUT since 1998.

        Perhaps he should be explaining why his figures are so different to both HADCRUT and the satellites.

        http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut3vgl/from:1998/to:2011/plot/gistemp/from:1998/to:2011

      • Dave N says:

        Strangely enough Cthulhu, that’s how the Scientific Method works. It doesn’t mean one is a liar, it just calls them into question about their findings

  5. Amino Acids in Meteorites says:

    How’s Hansen doing with that flooding of Manhattan thing?

    • Hal says:

      I am sure that in one of many parallel universes Manhattan has already been engulfed by rising water, thus vindicating Hansen.

      Isn’t the new mantra that the skeptics must prove Hansen wrong? Where is the Sliders’ Quinn Mallory when we need him?

    • Mike Davis says:

      AAM:
      That is sooooo yesterday! Now we are waiting for ocean front property in Denver!

  6. Nobama says:

    Anytime when even a small group of people share like views and seek to promulgate something via shared effort, you have a conspiracy. Conspiracies are not unusual, they are the norm.

    But (Tony) if you’re arguing that there could not exist a conspiracy within such a diverse and widespread group of scientists, you’re not looking closely enough. It isn’t a situation where this vast group meet somewhere to plot their next move.

    Racism in the south did not require collusion behind closed doors, but simply shared opinion. And due to that shared opinion, they acted in unison. But the CAGW cabal isn’t purely or even primarily a conspiracy. It would more accurately be described as a religious cult who feed and perpetuate a green mafia (with tax monies and that which they extort from business).

    The CAGW agenda is pressed forward by all those who seek to gain advantage from it. Malthusians who are often rich spoiled international political figures and billionaires, Pantheist nuts, Marxist ideologues (both homegrown and infiltrating after the fall of the Berlin wall), and simple rent seekers looking to make a killing off gullible governments.

    So this isn’t a “Conspiracy Theory” based on suspicions of things unknown, but simple observation of those things the “conspirators” say. They state in great detail their beliefs, intentions, and alliances. There’s no secret here.

    Governments long ago figured out if they wanted consensus, nothing achieved it faster than a little grease for the palm. The US government has been buying allegiance for as long as I can remember. They’re pouring Billions into this, and the chorus is singing their song. Cut off that funding, or redirect it toward discrediting the climate fantasy, and the entire cabal will march in the opposite direction.

    • Tony Duncan says:

      Nobama
      that is similar to the theory that Steve and mike and some others espouse here.
      I have seen similar arguments and I have explored these ideas with numerous people on here and pointed out the inconsistencies which are of course all pretty much ignored.
      As I have pointed out I do know some climate scientists and the caracateur presented here and on other right wing blogs, has no relation to the actual person or their actual views or how they conduct science.

      As I have pointed out to Steve repeatedly the only serious analogous situation I cans see that supports his views on this issue are the Lysenko conspiracy in Russia. The continental drift, and bacteria source of ulcers and others presented here have way too many incongruities to be applicable. In fact, as I have pointed out The valid comparison is Wegener and Arrhenius.
      The idea that grant money is able to completely debase a science based on so many different disciplines is hard to imagine.
      I am no pollyanna when it comes to how science is practiced. it is littered with greed, ego and envy. But there is also a culture of rigor, that while many times incomplete or with real errors, tends toward increasing a more accurate description of reality.

      • I forgot, most people are happy to give up their source of sustenance for their family – given the choice.

      • Tony Duncan says:

        Steve,

        Yup, all scientists are so desperate for work that they will manipulate research in order to appease their masters, even when they know that their fraud will be exposed in the future and they will forever be tainted as being part of the biggest conspiracy in the history of science.

      • Mike Davis says:

        TonyD:
        That is about the closest to the truth you have come. However they are open about their goals so it is not a conspiracy.

      • Robb says:

        Tony,

        Based on what you just wrote, would you also disagree with the popular meme that the skeptical scientists are a “small group with connections to big oil & tobbacco”? Because I’ve heard that one a lot.

        Why is it so inconcievable that a small group of AGW believing scientists couldn’t be pushing bad science for the endless flow of government grant money, power and celebrity that seems to be coming from it?

        Not that I believe all AGW science is corrupt, but most climate scientists use the data rpoduced by a small group “gatekeepers” (ie Mann proxies/HadCRU/GISS, etc), so results could be easily corrupted.

        Please note, that I’m not even saying this is the case, but it seems plausible. Especialy when it comes to Hansen and the activisim he practies along side his “science”.

        Science and activisim are like oil & water. You can not protest coal fired power plants and claim your science is unbiased.

  7. Russ says:

    TonyD, I guess, according to you, it must be a big payday for someone if they cut their own throats. How long do you think these researchers will be doing their work if there wasn’t nothing to be alarmed about?
    What I’m saying, to make it very clear, IS, bet if you wouldn’t be in business very long if you told your all your costomers that you over charge, or your competition does better quality work at a better price. But I guess you are willing to over pay and be cheated.

  8. Wade Park says:

    Dear Stevengoddard,
    Thanks for your thoughts, first of all i am 16 and i know that this isnt a “life or death” situation. its just whats been on my mind, and i want to see what you guys think.

    i have been going out with hansen for a month. and i think i really like him. but at the same time i dont like to b with him. like, whenever he is around i dont want him there, but then when he isnt i want him there. i am really busy and dont have much time to talk to him, or hangout, so there isnt much a a relationship there. now the main problem is my ex, justin. i still like him…a lot. he is such a jerk, i dont know y i cant get over him. but i Want 2 be with him not hansen. i can see myself having a future with him, and it hurts me so much to see him with other girls. dont get me wrong i like hansen too, but i wish i could be with justin.

    i told hansen that i still like justin n’ he was ok with it bcuz he likes other girls too. i want to stay with hansen bcuz he is a nice guy, but i dont think i wil be happy until im with justin
    Good Job!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s