New Record Low Temperature in Red Deer, Alberta

hmmmmmmm wrote:

What narrative?!?! The narrative that goes along the lines of the entire planet not wanting to drown, melt alive, or suffocate from noxious fumes? Who stands to gain from climate data manipulation??

Scientists who need to convince the public why they need government grants over another department without a good doomsday story.

debra zebra wrote:

Oh Dear wrote:

The point still stands, the odds of 6 of the last 140 years being the highest 6 on record by random chance is 0.0000000107% or 1 in 10,000,000,000.

Any reasonable person would recognize immediately, that the warming is not due to random chance.

Math: (6/140)*(5/139)*(4/138)*(3/137)*(2/136)*(1/135)

Any reasonable person would also recognize that the Earth, over its 4.6 billion years, has gone through periods of cooling and periods of warming. The recent warming is likely to be followed by a period of cooling and this current Global Warming crap is just that, crap. Would you, as a reasonable person, agree with that?

Of course I agree that the earth goes through natural periods of warming and cooling. The idea that the present warming is due to natural forces is simply unfounded.

Earth is supposed to be continuing on a natural cooling cycle right now:

400,000+ years of ice core data and Co2 levels have never passed 300 parts per million

Current level of Co2 is over 400 parts per million

What produces a sh*t ton of Co2? Oh yeah, burning coal and oil. HMMMMMMMMM

hmmmmmmm wrote:

debra zebra wrote:

Asking one thing of you. Just one. Will you admit that climate "scientists" in the past have manipulated the data to fit their narrative? Can you admit that? I am talking about Mann and that group as just one example.

What narrative?!?! The narrative that goes along the lines of the entire planet not wanting to drown, melt alive, or suffocate from noxious fumes? Who stands to gain from climate data manipulation??

Not sure you know what "narrative" means. Who stands to gain from data manipulation? Global Warming Alarmists. Very simple. If the Earth is not really warming from Greenhouse gasses they are out of their jobs as Global Warming Alarmists. They have been sounding the alarm bells for 40 years. The Earth is doing just fine. Thank you.

Hardloper wrote:

hmmmmmmm wrote:

What narrative?!?! The narrative that goes along the lines of the entire planet not wanting to drown, melt alive, or suffocate from noxious fumes? Who stands to gain from climate data manipulation??

Scientists who need to convince the public why they need government grants over another department without a good doomsday story.

Jesus Christ, that's a stretch. Alternatively, let's swap the narrative. Who stands to gain from the denial of climate science and global warming? Don't think too hard.

debra zebra wrote:

Remember after Hurricane Katrina the Global Alarmists were promising more frequent hurricanes? Well the last Cat 3 hurricane was Wilma in 2004 and there was not one single Cat 3 in over 10 years. But Global Alarmists don't consider the facts. They deal in alarmism and nothing else. Al Gore's tipping point of 2016 was 4 years ago. Al, what happened?

There actually is a problem.

Do you also smoke cigarettes and eat sugar, laughing about how "nothing has happened yet"?

A low class idiot in my high school once told me he had syphillis, and I asked if it caused any problems, and he arrogantly replied, "No, it goes away after a while," totally relaxed about how it had not affected him,, yet.

He probably has the terrorizing brain damage, now, from it. Reported as one of the worst pains a human can experience.

Do you also have debt and high blood pressure? Keep laughing about how nothing has happened yet. Hope you have a rich uncle to pay for your bypass, meds and inability to work many hours when you are middle-aged.

debra zebra wrote:

hmmmmmmm wrote:

What narrative?!?! The narrative that goes along the lines of the entire planet not wanting to drown, melt alive, or suffocate from noxious fumes? Who stands to gain from climate data manipulation??

Not sure you know what "narrative" means. Who stands to gain from data manipulation? Global Warming Alarmists. Very simple. If the Earth is not really warming from Greenhouse gasses they are out of their jobs as Global Warming Alarmists. They have been sounding the alarm bells for 40 years. The Earth is doing just fine. Thank you.

The Earth is not doing fine. What rock do you live under?

hmmmmmmm wrote:

Hardloper wrote:

Scientists who need to convince the public why they need government grants over another department without a good doomsday story.

Jesus Christ, that's a stretch. Alternatively, let's swap the narrative. Who stands to gain from the denial of climate science and global warming? Don't think too hard.

It's not a stretch. We know for a fact they have been acting this way, hence all the failed doomsday predictions.

Hardloper wrote:

hmmmmmmm wrote:

Jesus Christ, that's a stretch. Alternatively, let's swap the narrative. Who stands to gain from the denial of climate science and global warming? Don't think too hard.

It's not a stretch. We know for a fact they have been acting this way, hence all the failed doomsday predictions.

What does that even mean? Who are "they"?

debra zebra wrote:

Remember after Hurricane Katrina the Global Alarmists were promising more frequent hurricanes? Well the last Cat 3 hurricane was Wilma in 2004 and there was not one single Cat 3 in over 10 years. But Global Alarmists don't consider the facts. They deal in alarmism and nothing else. Al Gore's tipping point of 2016 was 4 years ago. Al, what happened?

You are correct to think there is not much you can do on an individual level about this, and your money will not be spent fairly because most politicians are only in it for themselves.

Responsibility does exist and matter. It adds up.

hmmmmmmm wrote:

Hardloper wrote:

It's not a stretch. We know for a fact they have been acting this way, hence all the failed doomsday predictions.

What does that even mean? Who are "they"?

Climate scientists have been making failed doomsday predictions for decades. For example they claim Great Britain will "potentially" turn into Siberian tundra by 2020 so they can get a few million dollars to study it.

Hardloper wrote:

hmmmmmmm wrote:

What does that even mean? Who are "they"?

Climate scientists have been making failed doomsday predictions for decades. For example they claim Great Britain will "potentially" turn into Siberian tundra by 2020 so they can get a few million dollars to study it.

I don't think you understand how the government grant administration process works.

hmmmmmmm wrote:

Hardloper wrote:

Climate scientists have been making failed doomsday predictions for decades. For example they claim Great Britain will "potentially" turn into Siberian tundra by 2020 so they can get a few million dollars to study it.

I don't think you understand how the government grant administration process works.

Explain how it works then.

hmmmmmmm wrote:

Done posting here, but it is embarrassing and discouraging to think that there are people like you thinking and living in our country.

I thought you said you are "done posting here" and yet you keep posting! I bet you are one of those climate change propagandists who gets paid to shill.

Where's The Global Warming? wrote:

hmmmmmmm wrote:

Done posting here, but it is embarrassing and discouraging to think that there are people like you thinking and living in our country.

I thought you said you are "done posting here" and yet you keep posting! I bet you are one of those climate change propagandists who gets paid to shill.

Why do you have to announce that you are leaving. Just leave. We won't miss you.

Hardloper wrote:

hmmmmmmm wrote:

What does that even mean? Who are "they"?

Climate scientists have been making failed doomsday predictions for decades. For example they claim Great Britain will "potentially" turn into Siberian tundra by 2020 so they can get a few million dollars to study it.

That's a ridiculously vague assertion. Please provide the names of some of those climate scientists, their sources and amounts of funding, and links to peer reviewed journal articles with evidence of that prediction.

And here is another record low temperature: Edmonton, Alberta set a record low temperature of -34 degrees Celsius yesterday on Jan 14th, 2020 and will set another record low temperature today for this time of year with -35 degrees Celsius. And this is with the heat island effect of one of the largest cities in Canada! Go freeze your buns off, all you Global Warming propagandists!

https://weather.gc.ca/city/pages/ab-50_metric_e.html

hmmmmmmm wrote:

Done posting here, but it is embarrassing and discouraging to think that there are people like you thinking and living in our country.

You should give up. You were humiliated over and over.

Hardloper wrote:

Helpful guide:

Warm temperatures? Proof of climate change

Cold temperatures? Proof of climate change

Mild temperatures? Proof of climate change

Terrorism and poverty? Caused by climate change

Illegal immigration? Caused by climate change

Arson? Climate change

I'll add to this...

The "Solutions":

Increase taxes on middle class of all First World nations

Consolidate power into Centralized/Federal Govts

Give up individual freedoms for the sake of fighting climate change

Where's The Global Warming? wrote:

And here is another record low temperature: Edmonton, Alberta set a record low temperature of -34 degrees Celsius yesterday on Jan 14th, 2020 and will set another record low temperature today for this time of year with -35 degrees Celsius. And this is with the heat island effect of one of the largest cities in Canada! Go freeze your buns off, all you Global Warming propagandists!

https://weather.gc.ca/city/pages/ab-50_metric_e.html

Do you really not understand how it can be much colder than average in one location on earth and much hotter than average in others on the same date? And that one day's data point does not constitute a trend?