With 2010 set to be one of the warmest on record why are deniers still talking about cooling?

There is a quite boring repetition to the drivel deniers peddle, Arthur Dent talks of you not supplying a link for the claim 2010 will be quite warm possibly one of the top three warmest, not sure were DAD has been but the idea and the data to support it are widely known.

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/2010/10

As of the end of Oct it (2010) was tied as the warmest year on record, not sure at all what the waffle about sunspots is meant to prove the graph in DAD's own link shows what is obviously the start of a new cycle if look at the same area in the previous 'start' there is little difference

Actual sunspot numbers have climbed from low teens to mid 20s through this year

ftp://ftp.ngdc.noaa.gov/STP/SOLAR_DATA/SUNSPOT_NUMBERS/INTERNATIONAL/2010/2010

Also not sure what a 5 year old story from yet another newspaper is meant to prove, what is it with deniers thinking newspaper are a source of science.

Then there Bob who goes for a straight out lie with a stevengoddard document to support it WOW.

wilds_of_virginia try's more newspaper and denier blogs, O.K. if the daily mail is a source if you run a search they have run many hostile stories on Jones but did also run this more recently

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1301256/BB...

Strange as the BBC did no more than the Mail did, in there previous stories, but that is the sort of thing British tabloids do, they are well known for their shifting sensationalizing of stories first one way and then the other, but of course deniers only pick the ones they want to.

In the last few weeks I have noticed an increase in desperation from deniers far more troll accounts far more pointless questions it is almost as if they knew they are running out of time, many of the moderates/fence-sitters are going to see 2010 is quite warm and added to 2009 (5th warmest) they are going to start to think about what deniers have been telling them for the last couple of years and that what they are saying, is not what is happening. Apart from the ones who think snow in their backyard is a guide to global climate, sorry I don't think they are bright enough to grasp much in the way of scientific concepts.

As for 2010, it is set to be one of the top three warmest years (as you say) but that is also what the lead climate agencies are saying, where in the top three depends on the last two months, if it does come in as the warmest year, I think deniers will try their usual tricks of claiming fraud or bad data or lots of noise about Al Gore but I think this time such hollow empty rhetoric will start to lose them many of the those moderates and fences sitters that actually make a good deal of those poll numbers, that deniers seem to think are so important.

Even when proven wrong, the deniers continue with their same false talking points as if nothing ever happened-

1. There *has* been statistically significant warming in the last 15 years. All that fox news hoopla last year is now rendered pointless, as recent temperatures have put it from about 93% to over 95% certaintly of a warming trend.

2. Scientists did not fudge numbers. In fact they were found to have done nothing illegal. They did what all people do in fights of this nature- ridicule and block their opponents. But they did nothing to fudge data.

Deniers believe in natural cycles, unless those natural cycles involve temporary cooling, in which case they are certain that global warming has stopped. Over the last 20 years they have claimed GW has stopped numerous times, only to see it continue the upward trend. It is at least, entertaining listening to these people.

According to what, will 2010 be the warmest year on record? there is no evidence to prove that it is.

Forget science for a minute, and use common sense to figure this out.

If by 2010 being PREDICTED to be the warmest year on record, based on this, "heating trend" please try and remember that the data was falsified to appear warmer than what it really was. Even with falsified data, they calculated the earth has heated up 1 degree celcius in 200 years. Common sense says thats a math error!!!! When the scientists who came up with this trend were asked how they came up with this data, they answered, "the machine we used doesn't actually exist." hmmmmmm. what does this tell you??

Last year, there was a big protest in england by students across various university's. why? some colledge kids hacked into the UN's database, and found a whole bunch of emails from the scientific community. What did they say? World leading, and, "trustworthy" scientists were tellng eachother to hide the evindence that the earth was cooling, not warming.

The media said that they were going to do a formal investigation, and in 6 months, have a definate answer if the emails were truthful or not. Is it funny that 12 months later, we just haven't heard the coutcome yet? This is because the media, and world governments made such a big brewha about earth warming, and the end of life as we know it, that when honest folks came with an honest answer, they were so embarrased, they never said that the outcome was actually saying that all Global warming was for was to improve ratings. Because its the media, and they are the filter to our lives, they casually, and fashionably turned a blind eye, leaving people like you scared, and without a seond voice.

now with a second voice, you decide whats right.

PS: in order for the earth to be warming, there bust be an upwards trend in climate, and it takes 50 years to have 1 point on a climate graph. The fundamentally flawed global warming theory came into the media eye in the early 90's..... 20 years, not 50.

Actually, mainstream media tends to panic 10-20 years after the problem is recognized. Since the Earth has run on a 30 year cycle of warming and cooling for at least the past century, and the majority of the people get their news from only mainstream media sources, the result is a great degree of hysteria over things that already happened, and that solved themselves.

We're currently in a cooling trend, at the moment.

According to global warming logic, this year is just weather! Why not simply plug the numbers in with the past 50-60 years' worth of temperature data and see what we get? Thirty years is the minimum time frame to even be thinking climate, correct? So let's revisit this every ten years, not weekly or monthly or even annually.

I've heard some people say on here that it's because 2010 is a strong el nino year (which it's not. it is now a la nina aka cooling) other's are so caught up in the idea of cooling that they are too heavily invested in their opinions. this is why they start to defy logic and reason and hold on dearly to any, i repeat, ANY thing that will support their perspective. you don't have to worry about people like this however, as long as you stay informed and keep a skeptical eye on what you see around you, you'll be fine. peace!

I suppose I must be a denier.. .Mainly because IT'S FREAKING COLD!!!!!!! Honestly, you people say that we nonbelievers will grasp onto anything and everything that we feel may explain away this evil global warming that you so earnestly preach. Well the absolute fact is that I'm still grabbing more layers of cloths than I ever have... sounds like a hard fact to me.

When global warming scientists are found fudging data and people still believing it, it's like walking in on a priest lining through the bible and writing stuff in there with a crayon and being all "holy Jesus!, this Bible thing is totally on point with no chance of any BS trickery!"

We know there has been "no statistically significant warming in the last 15 years." One of your guys said that. So I would be willing to say the atmosphere has not been warming or cooling.

The oceans, on the other hand, ARE cooling. The Argo buoys show this to be true, even after some "adjustments" (throwing out anomolous cold data points) in the data. The data showed a strong cooling trend before the "adjustments" were made.

@Earl Grey: Phil Jones said "no statistically significant warming in the last 15 years," in a BBC interview. Do you deny he said this? Do you think he is wrong?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1250872/Cl...

And everything I said about the argo buoys is true. They do show a cooling trend, and the lead researcher did throw out some cold points.

Because they're idiots

(NH + SH) / 2 prevents the NH from having dominance( land-vs-water). http://climateaudit.org/2008/08/07/north-versus-so...

One could effectively argue that having only 2 variables doesn't necessarily pose an accurate average. Or the rate of warming is uniformed ,considering regional bias.