It's official !!! "Global Warming causes lower temperatures" LOL

[as seen on tv]

http://www.sciencerecorder.com/news/study-reveals-link-between-global-warming-and-cooler-winters-melting-ice/

Is this the final nail in the coffin that discredits the left wing global warming industry? Faced with the irrefutable fact that temperatures have not risen in 18 years . . . that 2014 will be the coldest year in America on record . . . and that Europe is bracing for another savage winter . . . faced with these facts, the anti-carbon forces have struck back with their most unbelievable claim yet:

“Global warming causes lower temperatures”. It true – I mean, it’s true that they said it. Not that they’re telling the truth. Click on the link above.

Think about it – there is NO WAY to have a rational debate about climate change, if one side is going to claim that EVERY planetary event - and its opposite - are all caused by warming. Warming is now said to be producing . . .

- Harsher winters
- Warmer summers
- More rain
- Unseasonable drought
- “Extreme weather”
- Nearly 10 years in Florida without a hurricane
- Arctic ice melt
- Antarctic ice expansion

Get that? No matter what you see outside your window, the global warming groupies assert that your car, furnace, and air conditioner are directly responsible.

And they continue to rant that there’s only one solution: dismantle democracy and the rule of law, and allow the anti-capitalists to begin a pogrom against everything from cars to plastic to modern farming to Wal-Mart. They want to turn the clock back 200 years. But they’re too dumb to realize that mass starvation will ensue, and with it migrations of desperate people who will wipe out virtually everything that flies, walks on 4 legs, or swims in the ocean in order eat.

If you doubt this premise, just Google “bush meat in Africa” and see how the poor feed themselves there. You’ll see every variety of monkey, chimp, gorilla and lower mammals, shot in the wild, on offer for lunch in native markets. The guy with a gun is king over there. The same will be true in California, New York, Pennsylvania . . . in fact, if modern society collapse in America, expect that gun owners in agricultural/red regions will be the only ones left to repopulate the planet.

I’m tired of nitwits who aren’t even capable of growing patio tomatoes telling me the entire system which produces our food, clothing, shelter, and transportation must immediately be scrapped to satisfy their whims. If you feel that strongly about it, run for office, and subject your ideas to the rigors of democratic debate. I'm not signing up for a dictatorship of the a$$holes . . .

reader quiz - today's photo comes from what famous film? Hint, it's NOT "the day after tomorrow" - something a little classier.

 

[Arkady]

http://www.sciencerecorder.com/news/study-reveals-link-between-global-warming-and-cooler-winters-melting-ice/

Is this the final nail in the coffin that discredits the left wing global warming industry? Faced with the irrefutable fact that temperatures have not risen in 18 years . . . that 2014 will be the coldest year in America on record . . . and that Europe is bracing for another savage winter . . . faced with these facts, the anti-carbon forces have struck back with their most unbelievable claim yet:

“Global warming causes lower temperatures”. It true – I mean, it’s true that they said it. Not that they’re telling the truth. Click on the link above.

Think about it – there is NO WAY to have a rational debate about climate change, if one side is going to claim that EVERY planetary event - and its opposite - are all caused by warming. Warming is now said to be producing . . .

- Harsher winters
- Warmer summers
- More rain
- Unseasonable drought
- “Extreme weather”
- Nearly 10 years in Florida without a hurricane
- Arctic ice melt
- Antarctic ice expansion

Get that? No matter what you see outside your window, the global warming groupies assert that your car, furnace, and air conditioner are directly responsible.

And they continue to rant that there’s only one solution: dismantle democracy and the rule of law, and allow the anti-capitalists to begin a pogrom against everything from cars to plastic to modern farming to Wal-Mart. They want to turn the clock back 200 years. But they’re too dumb to realize that mass starvation will ensue, and with it migrations of desperate people who will wipe out virtually everything that flies, walks on 4 legs, or swims in the ocean in order eat.

If you doubt this premise, just Google “bush meat in Africa” and see how the poor feed themselves there. You’ll see every variety of monkey, chimp, gorilla and lower mammals, shot in the wild, on offer for lunch in native markets. The guy with a gun is king over there. The same will be true in California, New York, Pennsylvania . . . in fact, if modern society collapse in America, expect that gun owners in agricultural/red regions will be the only ones left to repopulate the planet.

I’m tired of nitwits who aren’t even capable of growing patio tomatoes telling me the entire system which produces our food, clothing, shelter, and transportation must immediately be scrapped to satisfy their whims. If you feel that strongly about it, run for office, and subject your ideas to the rigors of democratic debate. I'm not signing up for a dictatorship of the a$$holes . . .

reader quiz - today's photo comes from what famous film? Hint, it's NOT "the day after tomorrow" - something a little classier.

Temperatures have, in fact, risen within the last 18 years. It's just that the right-wing global-warming-denial industry has repeated the lie enough that most of the morons now think it's true. I wish I had some clever idea for how to convince the deniers of the evidence that's in front of them, but to be honest, I've always had a problem communicating effectively with people who have abnormally low IQs, so I'm not sure how you communicate information to denialists in a way they'll understand. Here's my attempt.

What has happened in the last 18 years is that atmospheric temperatures have only risen a little, whereas ocean temperatures have picked up a massive amount of heat:

Yet, even if you ignore the oceans entirely, there has still been warming. With the exception of 1998, the 10 warmest years in the 134-year record all occurred since 2000. The record for warmest year is shared by 2010 and 2005. As such, the longest you can claim there's been no warming, even if you ignore the vast majority of the phenomenon (which takes place in the oceans, which have greater heat capacity), and even if you take the bone-headed view that there's no warming in any period that doesn't set a new all-time annual record, is 8 years, not 18.

http://www.nasa.gov/press/2014/janu...long-term-climate-warming-trend/#.VE-Zwskkavg

 

[Hmmmm]

2014 will be the coldest year in America on record

Weather, not global climate. Also, the weather is predicted to be colder for much of the nation but not all. Look to the West. We are experiencing abnormally high temperatures where I live right now. The nicest October I have seen in years, maybe ever.

Europe is bracing for another savage winter .

Please repeat after me, "weather is not climate."

And they continue to rant that there’s only one solution: dismantle democracy and the rule of law

Dismantle democracy?! Come on now, how about a little sensibility and reality here. You have to admit that was really a pretty stupid statement.

 

[as seen on tv]

Temperatures have, in fact, risen within the last 18 years. It's just that the right-wing global-warming-denial industry has repeated the lie enough that most of the morons now think it's true. I wish I had some clever idea for how to convince the deniers of the evidence that's in front of them, but to be honest, I've always had a problem communicating effectively with people who have abnormally low IQs, so I'm not sure how you communicate information to denialists in a way they'll understand. Here's my attempt.

What has happened in the last 18 years is that atmospheric temperatures have only risen a little, whereas ocean temperatures have picked up a massive amount of heat:

Yet, even if you ignore the oceans entirely, there has still been warming. With the exception of 1998, the 10 warmest years in the 134-year record all occurred since 2000. The record for warmest year is shared by 2010 and 2005. As such, the longest you can claim there's been no warming, even if you ignore the vast majority of the phenomenon (which takes place in the oceans, which have greater heat capacity), and even if you take the bone-headed view that there's no warming in any period that doesn't set a new all-time annual record, is 8 years, not 18.

http://www.nasa.gov/press/2014/janu...long-term-climate-warming-trend/#.VE-Zwskkavg

why do climate groupies - when discussing ocean temps - always produce some arcane chart with an absurdly short time scale, and ignore the accepted ones? your attention is especially directed to the bottom chart, which documents a 0.4 degree oceanic temperature rise since the year 1600 CE, about when the "little ice age ended. temps today are about where they were before the "little ice age". so much for self serving skewed charts by the activist left . . .

 

[Fast Eddy]

The guy that stated the weather channel came out and said Global warming was a hoax.
Last year was on of the coldest years on record
We have an Early fall and cold records being set already.
Nine thousand Climate Scientists recently came out against Global warming.
The great lakes was 6 degrees cooler this summer than normal
Record Ice at the South Pole
North Pole added over 40% more ice last year.

The list of thins just goes on and on. THERE IS NO GLOBAL WARMING>

 

[LeilaniMP]

Dr. Zhivago for the film.

And you're 100% correct.

http://www.sciencerecorder.com/news/study-reveals-link-between-global-warming-and-cooler-winters-melting-ice/

Is this the final nail in the coffin that discredits the left wing global warming industry? Faced with the irrefutable fact that temperatures have not risen in 18 years . . . that 2014 will be the coldest year in America on record . . . and that Europe is bracing for another savage winter . . . faced with these facts, the anti-carbon forces have struck back with their most unbelievable claim yet:

“Global warming causes lower temperatures”. It true – I mean, it’s true that they said it. Not that they’re telling the truth. Click on the link above.

Think about it – there is NO WAY to have a rational debate about climate change, if one side is going to claim that EVERY planetary event - and its opposite - are all caused by warming. Warming is now said to be producing . . .

- Harsher winters
- Warmer summers
- More rain
- Unseasonable drought
- “Extreme weather”
- Nearly 10 years in Florida without a hurricane
- Arctic ice melt
- Antarctic ice expansion

Get that? No matter what you see outside your window, the global warming groupies assert that your car, furnace, and air conditioner are directly responsible.

And they continue to rant that there’s only one solution: dismantle democracy and the rule of law, and allow the anti-capitalists to begin a pogrom against everything from cars to plastic to modern farming to Wal-Mart. They want to turn the clock back 200 years. But they’re too dumb to realize that mass starvation will ensue, and with it migrations of desperate people who will wipe out virtually everything that flies, walks on 4 legs, or swims in the ocean in order eat.

If you doubt this premise, just Google “bush meat in Africa” and see how the poor feed themselves there. You’ll see every variety of monkey, chimp, gorilla and lower mammals, shot in the wild, on offer for lunch in native markets. The guy with a gun is king over there. The same will be true in California, New York, Pennsylvania . . . in fact, if modern society collapse in America, expect that gun owners in agricultural/red regions will be the only ones left to repopulate the planet.

I’m tired of nitwits who aren’t even capable of growing patio tomatoes telling me the entire system which produces our food, clothing, shelter, and transportation must immediately be scrapped to satisfy their whims. If you feel that strongly about it, run for office, and subject your ideas to the rigors of democratic debate. I'm not signing up for a dictatorship of the a$$holes . . .

reader quiz - today's photo comes from what famous film? Hint, it's NOT "the day after tomorrow" - something a little classier.

 

[Arkady]

why do climate groupies

What are "climate groupies"? Is that your term for people whose views on climate science align with those of 97% of leading climate scientists and the vast majority of scientists generally? If so, that's a very odd moniker. Are people who think the world is round "globe groupies"?

always produce some arcane chart ​

The chart isn't arcane. It's featured on the very first page of the National Oceanographic Data Center's page that covers ocean temperatures:

http://www.nodc.noaa.gov/OC5/3M_HEAT_CONTENT/

Front-page treatment by the world's leading oceanographic institution is the exact opposite of "arcane," which (since obviously you're unfamiliar with the word's definition) means "understood by few, mysterious or secret."

with an absurdly short time scale​

The time scale goes back to the early 1950s, and is the longest time scale we can consult that comes from direct global ocean measurements, since that's how long any systematic global measurements have taken place. Attempts to date back farther are estimated from things like ocean sediments. But the time scale is utterly immaterial to the issue we're discussing, since the issue is whether there's been warming in the last 18 years, so we only need a chart that goes back that far, which mine did. Did you even try to think that through before referencing the time scale? Did it occur to you how silly it would look when you attempted to discuss an 18-year trend by criticizing a graph that "only" went back about 60 years?

ignore the accepted ones​

The "accepted ones"? I referenced data from NASA and NOAA, two of the most widely accepted data sources in the world for climate science. You linked to a bunch of crap you got from conservative blogs.

your attention is especially directed to the bottom chart, which documents a 0.4 degree oceanic temperature rise since the year 1600 CE, about when the "little ice age ended. ​

No. Look at it again. Nowhere does it mention oceanic temperature rises. The Moberg graph was based on tree-ring data, as well as lake and ocean sediments, and doesn't purport to measure ocean temperatures only. Moreover, it doesn't deal with global warming at all, but rather just temperatures in the Northern Hemisphere, specifically. That warming period didn't just impact the Northern Hemisphere, but did impact it far more than elsewhere. For example, here's a comparison of the medieval warming period versus the current warming period in South America:

Regardless, the Moberg data actually tracks closely with other measures which show that we've moved past the Medieval Warming peak, even in the Northern Hemisphere.

The right-wing blogs rely on their readers being too stupid and lazy to check out the actual study from which the data comes, but it's freely available online:

http://stephenschneider.stanford.edu/Publications/PDF_Papers/MobergEtAl2005.pdf

See the study starting on page 613 entitled "Highly variable Northern Hemisphere
temperatures reconstructed from low- and high-resolution proxy data"

Here's a key line your right-wing sources don't want their dummies to know about:

"We find no evidence for any earlier periods in the last two millennia with warmer conditions than the post-1990 period — in agreement with previous similar studies."

Here's more recent work by the same climate scientist (Anders Moberg):

http://www.svemet.org/Observationer_Moberg.pdf

Here's the headline for policymakers:

Warming of the climate system is unequivocal,and since the 1950s, many of the observed changes are unprecedented over decades to millennia. The atmosphere and ocean have warmed, the amounts of snow and ice have diminished, sea level has risen, and the concentrations of greenhouse gases have increased.​

See page 7 for the graph, where it says:

In the Northern Hemisphere, 1983–2012 was likely the warmest 30-year period of the last 1400 years.​

 

[Mr. Friscus]

What are "climate groupies"? Is that your term for people whose views on climate science align with those of 97% of leading climate scientists and the vast majority of scientists generally? If so, that's a very odd moniker. Are people who think the world is round "globe groupies"?

always produce some arcane chart ​

The chart isn't arcane. It's featured on the very first page of the National Oceanographic Data Center's page that covers ocean temperatures:

http://www.nodc.noaa.gov/OC5/3M_HEAT_CONTENT/

Front-page treatment by the world's leading oceanographic institution is the exact opposite of "arcane," which (since obviously you're unfamiliar with the word's definition) means "understood by few, mysterious or secret."

with an absurdly short time scale​

The time scale goes back to the early 1950s, and is the longest time scale we can consult that comes from direct global ocean measurements, since that's how long any systematic global measurements have taken place. Attempts to data back farther are estimated from things like ocean sediments. But the time scale is utterly immaterial to the issue we're discussing, since the issue is whether there's been warming in the last 18 years, so we only need a chart that goes back that far, which mine did. Did you even try to think that through before referencing the time scale? Did it occur to you how silly it would look when you attempted to discuss an 18-year trend by criticizing a graph that "only" went back about 60 years?

ignore the accepted ones​

The "accepted ones"? I referenced data from NASA and NOAA, two of the most widely accepted data sources in the world for climate science. You linked to a bunch of crap you got from conservative blogs.

your attention is especially directed to the bottom chart, which documents a 0.4 degree oceanic temperature rise since the year 1600 CE, about when the "little ice age ended. ​

No. Look at it again. Nowhere does it mention oceanic temperature rises. The Moberg graph was based on tree-ring data, as well as lake and ocean sediments, and doesn't purport to measure ocean temperatures only. Moreover, it doesn't deal with global warming at all, but rather just temperatures in the Northern Hemisphere, specifically. That warming period didn't just impact the Northern Hemisphere, but did impact it far more than elsewhere. For example, here's a comparison of the medieval warming period versus the current warming period in South America:

Regardless, the Moberg data actually tracks closely with other measures which show that we've moved past the Medieval Warming peak, even in the Northern Hemisphere.

The right-wing blogs rely on their readers being too stupid and lazy to check out the actual study from which the data comes, but it's freely available online:

http://stephenschneider.stanford.edu/Publications/PDF_Papers/MobergEtAl2005.pdf

See the study starting on page 613 entitled "Highly variable Northern Hemisphere
temperatures reconstructed from low- and high-resolution proxy data"

Here's a key line your right-wing sources don't want their dummies to know about:

"We find no evidence for any earlier periods in the last two millennia with warmer conditions than the post-1990 period — in agreement with previous similar studies."

Here's more recent work by the same climate scientist (Anders Moberg):

http://www.svemet.org/Observationer_Moberg.pdf

Here's the headline for policymakers:

Warming of the climate system is unequivocal,and since the 1950s, many of the observed changes are unprecedented over decades to millennia. The atmosphere and ocean have warmed, the amounts of snow and ice have diminished, sea level has risen, and the concentrations of greenhouse gases have increased.​

See page 7 for the graph, where it says:

In the Northern Hemisphere, 1983–2012 was likely the warmest 30-year period of the last 1400 years.​

Earth: 4 billion years old
Earth with Man: 10,000 years old
Arkady's Charts: 60 years.

Yep, we can make absolute declarations based on that

 

[Arkady]

The guy that stated the weather channel

A TV weatherman is not an authority on climate science. The guy has exactly zero scientific credentials. His undergraduate degree is in journalism. He came from the old school of TV weathermen: dim-bulb spokes-models for the weather, whose job qualifications consist of being able to say inoffensively amusing things while standing in front of a map and pointing. Think: Brick Tamland. The fact that the imbeciles on the right need to point to someone with no scientific expertise to try to make a scientific point should tell you something, don't you think?

Last year was on of the coldest years on record​

No, it wasn't. It may have been cold in some regions (as can be said for absolutely any year) but globally it was tied for the fourth-hottest year on record:

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2014/01/21/3187581/noaa-nasa-2013-temperature/

We have an Early fall and cold records being set already.​

Every year there are regions with early falls and cold records. That's called weather, not climate.

Nine thousand Climate Scientists recently came out against Global warming. ​

What makes you think that? Are you referring to this?

http://www.petitionproject.org/

Hehe. First, it's not recent. It's been around since about 1997, and it's unclear how many of the signers would still support it after all the additional years of data collection since then. Second, that isn't a rejection of global warming, it's a rejection of the idea humans are responsible for it. Third, there's no serious attempt to verify the supposed credentials of the signers. You just fill out the petition, tell them you have a degree, and send it in. Fourth, even if they did verify it, that isn't nine thousand climate scientists, it's 9000 people with some sort of degree in a scientific field.

For example, here's one of the very first ones listed: Dr. Oscar Richard Ainsworth of Alabama:

http://www.tuscaloosanews.com/article/20010607/NEWS/106070329

As you can see, he's been dead since 2001, so there's no telling what he'd have made of the last decade and a half of data. Moreover, his Ph.D. isn't even in science, it's in math. His formal education dates back over 60 years, and he was retired for well over a decade when he signed the petition. So, is that the kind of "climate scientist" you're counting -- a retired math teacher with an education dating back to the 1940s?

The great lakes was 6 degrees cooler this summer than normal​

Repeat to yourself until it sinks in: weather isn't climate.

 

[Arkady]

Earth: 4 billion years old
Earth with Man: 10,000 years old
Arkady's Charts: 60 years.

Yep, we can make absolute declarations based on that

Try to keep up with the thread. No attempt was made to make "absolute declarations" about 4 billion years of earth's history. The issue being discussed was simply whether we've had 18 years without warming, for which purpose a 60-year chart is more than long enough.

 

[marvin martian]

Think about it – there is NO WAY to have a rational debate about climate change, if one side is going to claim that EVERY planetary event - and its opposite - are all caused by warming. Warming is now said to be producing . . .

- Harsher winters
- Warmer summers
- More rain
- Unseasonable drought
- “Extreme weather”
- Nearly 10 years in Florida without a hurricane
- Arctic ice melt
- Antarctic ice expansion

Get that? No matter what you see outside your window, the global warming groupies assert that your car, furnace, and air conditioner are directly responsible.

These proclamations are why the entire anthropogenic global warming hoax is falling apart. WAY too much exaggeration, drama, lies and fascistic communist jingoism being used to cover what is essentially an economic issue. The main goal of the AGW jihad is, of course, to dismantle capitalism and replace it with communism. It has ZERO to do with "the environment", those who think it does, and promote communism as the solution (like our friend Arkady here) are simply the useful idiots who have been used time and again by communist regimes for the purposes of propaganda.

 

[as seen on tv]

Dr. Zhivago for the film.

And you're 100% correct.

thank you. i'm dying to know - is that real snow? from a snow machine? or some sort of special effect? (this was before computer animation)

 

[as seen on tv]

These proclamations are why the entire anthropogenic global warming hoax is falling apart. WAY too much exaggeration, drama, lies and fascistic communist jingoism being used to cover what is essentially an economic issue. The main goal of the AGW jihad is, of course, to dismantle capitalism and replace it with communism. It has ZERO to do with "the environment", those who think it does, and promote communism as the solution (like our friend Arkady here) are simply the useful idiots who have been used time and again by communist regimes for the purposes of propaganda.

here's an amazing website - 50 years of exaggerated climate predictions. its hilarious. there are both warming and ice age predictions here - something for everyone

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/04/02/the-big-list-of-failed-climate-predictions/

 

[marvin martian]

thank you. i'm dying to know - is that real snow? from a snow machine? or some sort of special effect? (this was before computer animation)

I believe they used wax for that effect. The movie was filmed in Spain, so real snow would have been unavailable. I'm sure it was incredibly labor-intensive...

 

[marvin martian]

here's an amazing website - 50 years of exaggerated climate predictions. its hilarious. there are both warming and ice age predictions here - something for everyone

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/04/02/the-big-list-of-failed-climate-predictions/

That's funny stuff! I like the dramatic declarations of NO MORE SNOW IN EUROPE!!! and the END OF SKIING IN THE ALPS!!! and SPRING WILL BEGIN IN JANUARY!!!

 

[Alinvegas]

http://www.sciencerecorder.com/news/study-reveals-link-between-global-warming-and-cooler-winters-melting-ice/

Is this the final nail in the coffin that discredits the left wing global warming industry? Faced with the irrefutable fact that temperatures have not risen in 18 years . . . that 2014 will be the coldest year in America on record . . . and that Europe is bracing for another savage winter . . . faced with these facts, the anti-carbon forces have struck back with their most unbelievable claim yet:

“Global warming causes lower temperatures”. It true – I mean, it’s true that they said it. Not that they’re telling the truth. Click on the link above.

Think about it – there is NO WAY to have a rational debate about climate change, if one side is going to claim that EVERY planetary event - and its opposite - are all caused by warming. Warming is now said to be producing . . .

- Harsher winters
- Warmer summers
- More rain
- Unseasonable drought
- “Extreme weather”
- Nearly 10 years in Florida without a hurricane
- Arctic ice melt
- Antarctic ice expansion

Get that? No matter what you see outside your window, the global warming groupies assert that your car, furnace, and air conditioner are directly responsible.

And they continue to rant that there’s only one solution: dismantle democracy and the rule of law, and allow the anti-capitalists to begin a pogrom against everything from cars to plastic to modern farming to Wal-Mart. They want to turn the clock back 200 years. But they’re too dumb to realize that mass starvation will ensue, and with it migrations of desperate people who will wipe out virtually everything that flies, walks on 4 legs, or swims in the ocean in order eat.

If you doubt this premise, just Google “bush meat in Africa” and see how the poor feed themselves there. You’ll see every variety of monkey, chimp, gorilla and lower mammals, shot in the wild, on offer for lunch in native markets. The guy with a gun is king over there. The same will be true in California, New York, Pennsylvania . . . in fact, if modern society collapse in America, expect that gun owners in agricultural/red regions will be the only ones left to repopulate the planet.

I’m tired of nitwits who aren’t even capable of growing patio tomatoes telling me the entire system which produces our food, clothing, shelter, and transportation must immediately be scrapped to satisfy their whims. If you feel that strongly about it, run for office, and subject your ideas to the rigors of democratic debate. I'm not signing up for a dictatorship of the a$$holes . . .

reader quiz - today's photo comes from what famous film? Hint, it's NOT "the day after tomorrow" - something a little classier.

That would be Dr. Zhivago. Damn, I'm aging myself.

 

[middleview]

The guy that stated the weather channel came out and said Global warming was a hoax.
Last year was on of the coldest years on record
We have an Early fall and cold records being set already.
Nine thousand Climate Scientists recently came out against Global warming.
The great lakes was 6 degrees cooler this summer than normal
Record Ice at the South Pole
North Pole added over 40% more ice last year.

The list of thins just goes on and on. THERE IS NO GLOBAL WARMING>

No kidding....9,000 "climate scientists"? If you actually do a little research you will find a number of different views. These scientists a mostly in disciplines that have little to do with Climate.

Some think that global warming is happening but that it has nothing to do with human activity.
Some thing that it is happening but say we have no idea why.
Some say it is happening but doesn't matter.
Some question the accuracy of the predictions.

Find any who actually have degrees in Climate related subject and let me know how many say it is a hoax. I haven't found one. By the way...the founder of the weather channel has no related skills.

 

[Arkady]

here's an amazing website - 50 years of exaggerated climate predictions. its hilarious. there are both warming and ice age predictions here - something for everyone

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/04/02/the-big-list-of-failed-climate-predictions/

He sure isn't very bright, is he? Many of those predictions are so recent that they wouldn't even have had a chance to fail yet. The predictions are generally made in terms of general projections, without a particular timeline (at least as quoted on the site).

 

[trapdoor]

What are "climate groupies"? Is that your term for people whose views on climate science align with those of 97% of leading climate scientists and the vast majority of scientists generally? If so, that's a very odd moniker. Are people who think the world is round "globe groupies"?

always produce some arcane chart ​

The chart isn't arcane. It's featured on the very first page of the National Oceanographic Data Center's page that covers ocean temperatures:

http://www.nodc.noaa.gov/OC5/3M_HEAT_CONTENT/

Front-page treatment by the world's leading oceanographic institution is the exact opposite of "arcane," which (since obviously you're unfamiliar with the word's definition) means "understood by few, mysterious or secret."

with an absurdly short time scale​

The time scale goes back to the early 1950s, and is the longest time scale we can consult that comes from direct global ocean measurements, since that's how long any systematic global measurements have taken place. Attempts to date back farther are estimated from things like ocean sediments. But the time scale is utterly immaterial to the issue we're discussing, since the issue is whether there's been warming in the last 18 years, so we only need a chart that goes back that far, which mine did. Did you even try to think that through before referencing the time scale? Did it occur to you how silly it would look when you attempted to discuss an 18-year trend by criticizing a graph that "only" went back about 60 years?

ignore the accepted ones​

The "accepted ones"? I referenced data from NASA and NOAA, two of the most widely accepted data sources in the world for climate science. You linked to a bunch of crap you got from conservative blogs.

your attention is especially directed to the bottom chart, which documents a 0.4 degree oceanic temperature rise since the year 1600 CE, about when the "little ice age ended. ​

No. Look at it again. Nowhere does it mention oceanic temperature rises. The Moberg graph was based on tree-ring data, as well as lake and ocean sediments, and doesn't purport to measure ocean temperatures only. Moreover, it doesn't deal with global warming at all, but rather just temperatures in the Northern Hemisphere, specifically. That warming period didn't just impact the Northern Hemisphere, but did impact it far more than elsewhere. For example, here's a comparison of the medieval warming period versus the current warming period in South America:

Regardless, the Moberg data actually tracks closely with other measures which show that we've moved past the Medieval Warming peak, even in the Northern Hemisphere.

The right-wing blogs rely on their readers being too stupid and lazy to check out the actual study from which the data comes, but it's freely available online:

http://stephenschneider.stanford.edu/Publications/PDF_Papers/MobergEtAl2005.pdf

See the study starting on page 613 entitled "Highly variable Northern Hemisphere
temperatures reconstructed from low- and high-resolution proxy data"

Here's a key line your right-wing sources don't want their dummies to know about:

"We find no evidence for any earlier periods in the last two millennia with warmer conditions than the post-1990 period — in agreement with previous similar studies."

Here's more recent work by the same climate scientist (Anders Moberg):

http://www.svemet.org/Observationer_Moberg.pdf

Here's the headline for policymakers:

Warming of the climate system is unequivocal,and since the 1950s, many of the observed changes are unprecedented over decades to millennia. The atmosphere and ocean have warmed, the amounts of snow and ice have diminished, sea level has risen, and the concentrations of greenhouse gases have increased.​

See page 7 for the graph, where it says:

In the Northern Hemisphere, 1983–2012 was likely the warmest 30-year period of the last 1400 years.​

And the tree-ring data doesn't support the current data put forth by the IPCC -- this was made clear by the emails released in "Climategate" a few years back.

 

[Arkady]

And the tree-ring data doesn't support the current data put forth by the IPCC -- this was made clear by the emails released in "Climategate" a few years back.

There are many sources that go into the IPCC consensus. Some differ from the consensus data in one direction, some in the other. The IPCC consensus may be overstating the issue or understating it. For now, though, it's the consensus precisely because it provides the best fit for all the available data taken together. The faux-scandal the conservatives created around some out-of-context snippets from emails (by researchers cleared of any wrongdoing multiple times by independent inquiries) doesn't change that.