What Part Of This Graph Isn’t Clear?

Bd5qf5uCYAEC6eQ (1)

The deluded minions of Hansen convince themselves that his forecasts were correct. Classic case of the Emperor’s New Clothes.

About stevengoddard

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

14 Responses to What Part Of This Graph Isn’t Clear?

  1. stewart pid says:

    The GLO-BULL warming loons have come into 2014 in a fighting mood and are telling their lies more often and screaming the lies louder in order to try and drown out any debate or opposition to their message. I first noticed the silliness on blogs about the cold weather with the claims of the cold being caused by globull warming and the onslaught has continued. Desperation??

  2. NavarreAggie says:

    WRT alarmists’ desperation, is there any truth to the rumor that The “weather” Channel went to Facebook and Twitter to protest the DirecTV cancellation only to be lambasted by commenters for their weather/CAGW hype?

    I don’t have either Facebook or Twitter, so I can’t validate that rumor. Maybe someone from this audience would be interested in checking out that lead.

  3. Mike Mellor says:

    Stewart, the prophets of global doom certainly do seem to have made new year resolutions to double and treble the volume of propaganda, don’t they? I’m not a conspiracy theorist but after Climategate I don’t doubt that the high priests coordinate their marketing plans.

  4. omnologos says:

    Texas sharpshooter fallacy

  5. Donna K. Becker says:

    Didn’t Obama recently say that climate discussions in the White House are “heating up”? If they’re so certain, why should that be?

  6. daveburton says:

    The only thing that might be unclear in that graph to some people is that “BAU” stands for “Business As Usual.”

    In other words, Scenario A (BAU) is what really happened with CO2 emissions. But temperatures are tracking at or below Scenario C, which is what supposedly would have happened if impossibly drastic CO2 emission reductions had been implemented.

  7. gator69 says:

    Obey-Warm: “These aren’t the scenarios you’re looking for.”

  8. Keitho says:

    Hanson’s scenario C was based on a sharp reduction in man made CO2. From what I understand the generation of man made CO2 and the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere exceed the levels used by Hanson for scenario A.

    If these palookas want to show how far off Hanson was then they couldn’t have done better.

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