"He'll be dead by morning.
#2 | POSTED BY SHEEPLESCHISM"

Hillary already sent his family her condolences over his suicide next Tuesday.

#25 | POSTED BY DANFORTH

Boo ---- Hoo. Ocean levels rise and fall without the help of man. Some of these areas never should have been built and I don't want to bear the cost of their poor decisions. Take away federal flood insurance and we can start building in sustainable areas again - this is include New Orleans or in the woodlands or fault lines of California. But the situation in FL is not just about sea level rise - it is about the land SINKING. Which is why Gore and Obama have no issue buying beachfront property elsewhere.

"And they learn new things that tell them more about the past."

So, they learned that people 100 years ago where too stupid to accurately read a thermometer?

"You really think worldwide climate scientists could all agree to a massive conspiracy and everyone would keep it a secret?
#23 | POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY"

How is it a secret? They are called out on the BS constantly which is why the US is not part of the Paris Climate Accord and Obama and Gore are buying beachfront property. It is just dummies like you that choose to spend 25% more on your electricity to virtue signal changes that don't collectively add up to a pinch of ---- that are affected by this nonsense.

"We find new methods informed by progressive learning to remove bias. "

If that were the case, you would apply increased weighting on weather stations that have been the most compliant (double readers, no change in location, no change due to rapid development in the area resulting in an urban heat island effect. But that is not what climate 'scientists' do. They given greater weight to the global readings despite that record not even being anywhere close to complete until the 1960's with the oceans completely uncovered until Argo was implemented. So, I call BS on that rationalization.

"100 years ago, they relied on mercury."

Again, you are correcting the temperature readings now from 100 years prior based on them using mercury? Really? I don't think you even understand how the temperature has been corrected. Nothing to do with mercury, has to do with applying 'smoothing' records where you discount actual readings. So, while the actual temperature records that are reported on your local news are the same as recorded at that point in time, you climate 'scientists' are saying - "no, it was not 106 degrees in Kansas on that day, it was actually 95 degrees. It is ridiculous.

"Now we have ensembles of sensors within a single unit, we quantify the variance, and find aggreement through methods like Kalman filters, quantile mapping, et al. Modern methods are quantitative and objective.
#15 | POSTED BY HORSTNGRABEN"

The fact is that NONE of that is required now as you can take satellite readings. Further, we have Argo and the weather balloon data to know the changes at the atmospheric levels. And those numbers simple do not support the underlying model of global warming.

"This thing called the advancement of human knowledge. Something republicans know nothing about. Which is why people who think the earth is 6000 years old prefer your party.
#12 | POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY "

Clearly, you do not understand the issue. What the climate 'scientists' routinely do is to go back into the temperature record of the LAST 100 YEARS, and then systematically decrease the actual recorded temperatures that were captured at that time. There is literally zero justification to CONTINUE to do this action. I could understand a 1 time correction, but there have been many, many major corrections to the exact same data set - always making the past 'cooler' - especially the heat waves of the 30's and 50's - the 30's being most notable as they still hold most heat records across the US. Their goal is obvious, they need to cool the 30's to make the current temperatures seem like an anomaly when they really aren't when taking into account those heat waves and the long term heating trend since the end of the last ice age.

I have to call BS on a lot of this nonsense. First, the current temperature anomaly is 0.55C for the world (not very believeable) and 0.22C for the continental USA. The USA is at least defendable as there is actual data being collected - but the world record is just utter nonsense of non compliant temp sensors, etc destroyed even further via data smoothing.

But this is the part of this article I liked best regarding 'the science is settled':

"Hausfather found that most of this overshoot was caused not by a flaw in the model's basic physics, however. Instead, it arose because pollution levels changed in ways Hansen didn't predict. For example, the model overestimated the amount of methane"a potent greenhouse gas"that would go into the atmosphere in future years. It also didn't foresee a precipitous drop in planet-warming refrigerants like some Freon compounds after international regulations from the Montreal Protocol became effective in 1989"

So, the model is WRONG but we have excuses why - but no real proof mind you - but we suspect these things to have influences. It is utter trash of a forecast regardless of how many excuses you want to throw out about its quality. The problem with the forecasts is that they don't understand the feedback loops so warming is always lower than predicted. So, to keep up the scare tactics, they are still manipulating the historic data to 'cool the past'.

Seriously, it is nearly 100 years since the temperatures were recorded. The have been analyzed for the last 40. Why on earth are the climate 'scientists' still decreasing the actual recorded temperatures in climate record? What possible justification is there for continually manipulating the data from the past?