Cooper vs. Berman on Obama’s Birth Certificate

Fun stuff:

86 Responses to “Cooper vs. Berman on Obama’s Birth Certificate”

  1. leftbehind Says:

    This why I get so pissed off when people try to say Obama is a Keynesian! He was clearly born in this country…

  2. shcb Says:


  3. Craig Says:

    The whole birther thing is crap. But hey, they’re just askin’ questions!

  4. shcb Says:

    There were some interesting aspects to this story, like how little documentation is required and how little constitutional experts actually knew about this issue until they studied it more but at this point there is nothing to be gained by pursuing it other than to see if you can keep it from happening again.

  5. enkidu Says:

    well done junior! you’ve managed to craft some blatherings that could be taken as either a) keep this sort of nonsense from happening again to any qualified candidate or b) keep us from ‘electing’ (ah shur din vote fer that mudhut π!@@#&!) any more keynesian usurpers commie sociamalists.

    Do you *ever* read and, you know, understand information sources other than rightwing nutjobbery? Try the BBC. It’s in English. Bit diffrn frum yer ‘Murkkkhin, but hopefully none of the big words will trip you up ( That would be a good start. I know the hardwired ‘libs iz teh Evil’ perceptual ‘filter’ has so polarized your pumpkin that up is down, black is white, dogs is cats and sayin “mudhut countries” aint racist, and yer a bigot teh say so!

  6. NorthernLite Says:

    There’s a word we online gamers use to describe what Cooper did to Berman…


  7. knarlyknight Says:

    yea, PWNED^100

    Cooper did it with relevant facts and without avoiding any issues Berman brought up. That’s what journalism is supposed to bring to the table. So rare, and so beautifully executed. I’d like to see Cooper do the same to John Gross on all aspects of the NIST report:

  8. shcb Says:

    Well, Berman didn’t set the bar too high.

    Enky, Enky, enky, you just seem to have a one track mind. Keep this from happening again by making candidates prove birthplace before the primaries, that sort of thing. Do you have a special keyboard to type that way, I tried it and mine doesn’t work.

    Wouldn’t it have been nice for you to have just asked me what I had in mind?

  9. shcb Says:

    But Cooper did a good job, he was well prepared. I don’t want to take anything from him.

  10. NorthernLite Says:

    I like how AC challenges people while remaining calm and cool, and the interviews always seem to stay civil even when pitted against whackos.

  11. knarlyknight Says:

    NL – Exactly, that’s what’s so powerful AC maintains respect and provided Berman plenty of opportunity to refute the facts that showed Berman as the dumb tool he has become with this issue; that Berman could not respond, even after the interview by not even delivering what he promised kills his credibility.

  12. shcb Says:

    I wouldn’t be too hard on this guy, he is just trying to get a one up on his opponent without giving a lot of thought to it. He found something he thought he could latch onto. Kind of like, wasn’t it Charlie Rangel that said the slave traders had dumped so many bodies in the ocean the sharks still feed in those waters. Or Pat Schroeder shocked that Rush Limbaugh’s mother was eating dog food. Cynthia McKinney, oh Cynthia, you could write a book on her nonsense. They read a press release or their staff finds something and they go out and make an impassioned speech like they have given it a lot of thought, but in reality the day of the speech is the first day they heard of the issue.

  13. knarlyknight Says:

    That’s more than enough reason to go very hard on this guy, Berman. He’s in a position of leadership and should be damned for blasting loaded cannons without getting simple facts straight or checking his sources. Plus, he’s got a Bill going forward based on his ridiculous premise, that is the height of irresponsiblity and incompetence. And you think it’s just par for the course. Talk about pathetic standards, sounds like Bush regime all over again. Are you enjoying theeconomy Bush developed for you over his 8 year rule? It’s going to take another 10 or 20 to fix (excluding the lost progress…), and that’s assuming people like Berman are NOT involved.

  14. shcb Says:

    His bill seems reasonable, or some version of it. It would probably be too cumbersome to present an original birth certificate to each state but it could be presented to say the attorney general who could then certify it to all 50 states, something like that. He should have stuck to that point, but he didn’t.

    As far as the economy, that was something that developed over the last few decades and it will continue to struggle as long as we follow the path Obama wants to go down, raising taxes now would be very irresponsible. Lowering Clinton era taxes helped keep the economy from tanking earlier but Bush should have fixed the mortgage mess. He saw it coming but didn’t expend enough political capital to fix it, in fact he expanded the problem in some areas.

  15. knarlyknight Says:

    Haven’t read the Bill. You got me.

    Re: Economy – I think you should blow up every building, hydro-station and other item of real value (much as you did in Iraq), default on all loans, distribute gold equally to everyone American and legal or illegal immigrant, and start over again from scratch.

  16. shcb Says:

    I haven’t read the bill but from what I understand it says every candidate has to show an original birth certificate before the primaries in Texas. We don’t have a national election for president; we have 50 separate elections so each state would have to make similar legislation. I think in theory it is a good idea in and of itself, but hard to implement. I also think this Berman character is using the issue to grind his particular axe, which is why Cooper had him for lunch.

  17. shcb Says:

    Haven’t heard much about that UN climate summit in Mexico have you? I guess the rich clean countries don’t want to give money to the poor polluters anymore, or AlGore. Scams have a shelf life.

  18. Smith Says:

    LOL, you right wingers and your boogeymen.

    You see, AlGore (apparently that is one word now?) invented the Internet so he could conspire with other evil geniuses across the world to build a doomsday device that would pull the Sun and the Earth together, thus killing everyone in an inferno of death and destruction. The device has been completed; however, AlGore and his co-conspirators used all of their money developing the device, and now they cannot afford to terraform Mars to allow them to escape Earth prior to its destruction. So now, AlGore is using the device gradually in order to slowly heat the Earth so he can promote the AGW pseudoscience mumbo-jumbo and sell carbon credits as part of a get rich quick scam that will enable him to accumulate the riches necessary to proceed with the construction of a spaceship and the technology required to make Mars inhabitable.

    Unfortunately for him, feared keyboard warrior, shcb, is on to his scheme and is spreading the word around all the biggest sites on the Internet. In a delicious bout of irony, the brave and mighty shcb is using AlGore’s invention against him. Can shcb defeat AlGore in time? Or are we all doomed to a fiery demise at the hands of the nefarious AlGore? Find out in the next griping episode of “shcb: Wingnugget of Truth”.

  19. shcb Says:

    Nah, he’s just an opportunist that created his own opportunity, cashed in on it and now has to look for a new goat to skin. Rush invented the AlGore one word after the debate with the spray on tan, said he looked like Igor. That one has been around for years. It’s one of the few Enky like misspellings I do.

  20. shcb Says:

    You did hear that he said last week or so that he only endorsed ethanol as an alternative source to save the planet because he needed the campaign contributions of the corn lobby. But now that he doesn’t need the money he admits that it is actually hurting the climate, huh, where have we heard that before?

  21. Smith Says:

    “Rush invented the AlGore one word”

    I thought it was just a typo, but it turns out you are just an idiot. Good to know, Mr. “I don’t listen to Limbaugh”.

  22. shcb Says:

    You have to read what I say, not what you want me to say.

  23. knarlyknight Says:

    Why does Smith have to do that? It’s more entertaining his way. I was starting to wonder if a whole day would go by without anyone calling you an idiot. Not to worry…

    What’d you think of Obama’s “compromise” on tax breaks? (I thought it was great, it puts off the inevitable for a while and provides a little more time to pray for economic miracles. It shows how pragmatic Obama is, a sign of a good leader, although I wonder if it will look to many like it is naivety.)

  24. shcb Says:

    Thanks for the support. It is entertaining in moderation, I enjoy a good jab as much as the next guy, but it gets old when that is the answer to every comment.

    I think this is what you are going to see for a while. This is where if anything is going to get done it is going to be by compromise. People think bipartisanship is when both sides get along, but it really only works when both side have a lot more to lose than gain. It’s like watching brothers fight, they roll around punching each other until one gets the best of the other and then stand up and smile for the camera with their arms around each other.

    Of course I think it is a great deal, I don’t have to tell you that. But look at it deeper, this probably means he will get his treaty, and Democrats will get their extension of unemployment, so everyone gets something they can take back to their target audience and say “look what I did!” (BTW, in this case they all three are probably a good thing )There is also a lot of room here for congress to fiddle with, the SS deduction for instance, that is low balled. It will end up a little higher, then the D’s can say they saved SS and the R’s can say they weren’t afraid to cut SS even though it was only a fraction of a point.

    A good Pearl Harbor Day to you and happy happy birthday to me!

  25. NorthernLite Says:

    I thought you guys had a massive deficit problem and now Obama is going to add to it by almost a trillion dollars by extending the Bush tax cuts for two years?!

    Obama is the biggest pussy I have ever seen, right up there with the so-called leadership of the Democratic party.

    I hope the progressive Dems down there dump Obama for 2012 and actually send someone to Washington that will fight for progressive vaules.

    What a joke this guy turned out to be.

  26. NorthernLite Says:

    Caved on healthcare. Caved on climate change. Caved on taxes.


  27. knarlyknight Says:

    It gets worse, doesn’t it?
    Caved on torture & extraordinary rendition. Endorses extra-judicial killings of anyone he deems to be worthy of killing.

    America these days sounds a lot like medieval Europe.

  28. shcb Says:

    He got beat guys, he didn’t cave, he tried to push your agenda through and the folks didn’t like it that is what representative government does whether it is for the better or worse, that is what it does. You don’t want to raise taxes when the economy is in the dumps. Clinton (and congress) could raise tax rates because the economy was booming, Bush (and congress) needed to cut tax rates back to keep the economy stable, which it did for quite a while. It would be good if Obama (and congress) would cut tax rates now to stimulate the economy but holding them steady is at least a start. Getting people buying things will raise revenue. Then to reduce the deficit you don’t spend so damn much money, stop ObamaCare now before it does any more damage, stop farm subsidies for things like ethanol and cut back on some of this green crap, the earth is just fine.

  29. Smith Says:

    “Bush (and congress) needed to cut tax rates back to keep the economy stable, which it did for quite a while.”

    There isn’t a “LOL” big enough to adequately respond to this shit. You can apply that to your whole comment, but that line in particular needed to be emphasized.

  30. NorthernLite Says:

    I don’t think I could respond any better than that.

    They beat themselves. Badly.

    For christ sake Americans voted them in the Senate, House and WH for the reasons they campaigned on (progressive policies) and they disappointed on all fronts. Then they sit there and wonder why they lose the Senate – well duh! You didn’t do what you were sent there to do you fucking mo-mo’s!!

    I hope they lose the House and WH next. They don’t deserve to be there.

  31. knarlyknight Says:

    Yea, Smith that was about the perfect response, except you forgot to call him an idiot.

  32. shcb Says:

    No NL, America didn’t vote them in because of liberal policies any more than they voted in the ’94 congress because they wanted conservative government. This country is center right, Newt made the same mistake these guys did, he thought by just winning they had a mandate. They didn’t want Clinton’s left wing agenda so they voted for the other guy, then Clinton moved to the center and got reelected. They voted Obama in for various reasons, mainly that the economy was tanking and they needed someone to blame, then here is this good looking black guy that is promising hope and change, they didn’t know what change and they hoped they could tell their grandchildren they helped get the first black man elected. Well, that novelty has worn off and the change isn’t what they wanted, they wanted what they had, they just wanted it to work. You have so much to learn.

  33. NorthernLite Says:

    How can you claim to be a centre-right country when most of your history was governed by Dems? Social Security, Medicare… at mere mention of touching those “socialist” programs and all hell breaks loose. Doesn’t sound very centre-right to me.

    You remind me of many conservatives up here… they just make things up out of thin air.

  34. shcb Says:


  35. NorthernLite Says:

  36. knarlyknight Says:

    NL, wow. Oberman changed my mind. Didn’t realize the “deal” was so bad.

  37. shcb Says:

    Ouch, He’s playing in the big game now isn’t he, wonder if he knows the rules?

  38. NorthernLite Says:

    Yeah, Obama has upset pretty much every progressive out there, Republicans never liked him to begin with and moderates view him as flimsy.

    He’s done.

    Am I wrong in my thinking?

  39. enkidu Says:

    donchye git it boy?
    libz iz dum!
    rush sed Algore iz wrong!
    tax cuts pay fer themselves!
    nuff said!
    hurf durf!

    how the heck do you compromise with that ‘mentality’?
    gerrymandering (lol!)

  40. shcb Says:

    I don’t think he is necessarily done, I mean who else are the progressives going to vote for, unless like you say he doesn’t even get the nomination, the base would have a large effect on the outcome of the nomination so if he continues to upset them and a strong Democratic contender like possibly Hillary came forward I suppose it is possible that he could be finished. Clinton came back from a similar setback, remember he lost the house for the first time in 40 years. So many times we attach events to the president when in reality it was more congress’s fault, in the case of Clinton losing the house I believe that was mostly his fault, but he came back from it. One of the ways he came back was hiring Dick Morris, he hired Morris as a political consultant to get a view of someone on the right as much as anything else. Clinton was smart enough to realize he had surrounded himself with yes men and a change that little bit, we will see if Obama does something similar.

    I’m going to toss something out there, the day after the election I told my wife that it is very possible that Republicans might have to make a deal with Obama that would allow him to get reelected. I don’t know what the deal is I don’t even know what issue it might be attached to, but I think in the climate we’re in there’ll be some back room deals made with him of almost historical portions, we are in a funny state where people really don’t like either side, and that gets politicians nervous, they both understand that they are on a short leash but at the same time need to get reelected. so I figure there will be a lot of compromises made and many of those compromises will be made to garner support from that all-important middle road voter. Now this almost essentially requires that the base will be upset so they also have to give each other some big wins in areas that people would understand these issues can feel a little good about the candidate, at least good enough to not turn to a third-party, or fail to nominate an incumbent. Just a thought.

  41. shcb Says:

    Here is what the guy up the road a piece thinks:

  42. enkidu Says:

    “That is, a President who can’t master his own party cannot continue to master the country.”

    Master? Really? Our first black president is the “master” of our country? vodkapundit been chugging a bit too much of the cheap stuff (or mb antifreeze). I’m sure you’ll call me a bigot or worse, but sly winkwinknudgenudge ‘master/slave’ analogies are just a tad too racist for anyone with a functioning frontal lobe to take seriously.

    The right wing of America has gone completely insane. WF Buckley is spinning in his grave so fast, it’s slowing down the rotation of the planet (or something).

    Try an information source other than wrong wing nut job whackdoodles. You know, the BBC, GAO, even the New York Times (which has lots of conservative commentary, on the other hand, WSJ has gone off the deep end of the crazy pool)

  43. knarlyknight Says:

    Haven’t watched the pjmedia skit yet, but… it sounds like you got good ears for dogwhistles, Enk.

  44. shcb Says:

    Boy you had to stretch for that one. Buckley is doing just fine, you can misrepresent anything to make any point and you routinely do. Of everything us Colorado boys had to say that is all you could come up with?

  45. enkidu Says:

    stretch? jumpin jeebuz! I just quoted your ‘information’ source (oh sorry ‘opinion, rightwingnutjob opinion, of course)

    The word you are looking for is control, guide, lead. Master? Sorry, but that smacks of master/slave. An intentional choice by you birther nutjobs. gfy

  46. knarlyknight Says:

    Master has different meanings, several of which fit perfectly in the context used. But certainly the connotation and use of that word with respect to a black person is outrageous. Was it just a thoughtless, poor choice of words? Doubt that. Was it a dogwhistle coded message? I can’t give PJmedia enough of my time to work that out. Was it an intentional inflamatory choice of language to get people like you riled up intentionally so they can ridicule them further with taunts of “Look how crazy PC correct them dumb liberals git, krist almighty are they tender babies!” Probably, it fits their MO. wwnj’s = idiotic jerks.

  47. shcb Says:

    I guess you guys just look at things on a more depraved level than I do, I just never made that connection and probably never would’ve unless I was fishing for some way to avoid the discussion.

  48. shcb Says:

    I don’t know Green personally of course, but I’ve read quite a few of his writings and I have never heard him say anything derogatory toward groups other than liberals and politicians. I also know the Northern Colorado area quite well since I’ve lived here most of my adult life and I can tell you there really isn’t any racial tension in this area, especially toward blacks. For the most part the few black people in this area have moved here of their own free will and have assimilated well, they are also well educated and hard-working, you’re more likely to work for a black man in this area than you are to have one work for you. I just can’t imagine that he meant it in the context you’re referring unless he was trying to draw out people like Enky and his sycophants; he does seem to have an ornery streak. If that was his intention, then, well-done Vodka Pundit.

  49. enkidu Says:

    As usual, it’s the dam dum libs fault!

    Choosing to use the word ‘master’ isn’t just some neutral turn of a phrase, like mudhut countries, boy or whatever. Just like wwnj’s comment at the top of the page: aint ah bein cleverer than a hungry coon (agin, totally not racist!) tah use wurds at wud make em stoopid libs all crazy n sh!t. har har har! hurf durf If you wish to be kind and generous, it is just an unconscious racism, if you want to be more realistic, it’s an inbred (har har har!) lack of edumakashun and too much fox ‘news’.

    I have sycophants? Really? Who knew!

    There are two distinct approaches to dealing with wrong wing nut jobbery: you can either engage in a constantly shifting mealstrom of moving goal posts, semantic infiltration, misinformation and longwinded blather or you can call it bullshit, make fun of it, push it from the public square and move on. Buckley had interesting things to say, wwnj here does not. He just vomits up whatever rush and the rest of the hate radio yakers declare the outrage du jour.

  50. shcb Says:


  51. knarlyknight Says:

    CNN Breaking News… — Defying President Obama, House Democrats vote not to bring up tax deal he negotiated with GOP in its current form.

    Who’s the Master now, boy?

  52. shcb Says:

    Keep watching, this is where it gets fun, some are standing on principal and some want something, pork is about to be served.

  53. Smith Says:

    “pork is about to be served”

    The Repubs already ordered their BBQ sandwiches, the Dems just want to make sure they get some too.

  54. shcb Says:

    i thought it was funny that Olbermann wanted Obama to hire the Fox News guys for his advisors.

  55. NorthernLite Says:

    I was under the impression he already did.

  56. enkidu Says:

    funny how the Rethugs big earmarks ban lasted less than 3 days: and who broke it? none other than hostage taker Senator Kyl (R AZ), the same guy who is flushing our national security down the toilet so he can get some more pork. Weren’t the thuggles bellowing about how they are the national security party?

    And some of the biggest earmarker pols are Rs too.

    Ah well, one man’s pork is another man’s steak (in a fancy restaurant, at a whites only club, and the steak had damn well better be from an endangered animal)

    At first this ‘deal’ seemed like a complete capitulation: 13 months of unemployment extension (not *new* benefits, just extending the current deal) at a cost of $80B for two years of tax breaks for the richest, who have done very very well earning-wise over the past few decades, not withstanding the bush mega-repression (tax breaks for the rich are $800B – wait wasn’t the deficit the big thing for rightwingnutjobs and teabircher/birthers? oh nm, reality intrudes so… liberally). Now I am not so sure, several articles have pointed out that there are some things in there that make it more balanced than at first glance. ie not a complete abject capitulation

    Regardless, the Social Security payroll tax break is going to just hasten the day Rs feast on the corpse of SS (which will be great, until the bubble bursts and then there had better be a wise and feisty Democrat to save our collective bacon)

  57. enkidu Says:

    heh, bush mega-repression should be mega-recession
    that typo is soooo 2003

  58. shcb Says:

    I like Caddell, if Obama has enlisted his help that was a wise move, Beckel is good too, pretty media savy, but Caddell is smart and well balanced, still too far to the left for me but that is what elections are for.

  59. knarlyknight Says:

    “soooo 2001” you mean… it is 9/11 related…

    (The Patriot Act was signed into law by President G.W. Bush on October 26, 2001)

  60. shcb Says:

    who you talking to Knarly?

    Just got one of those news flashes from Fox “Beck: The revolution is now!” good lord, we won the House, one branch, one of three, grudgingly the voter gave us one more little chance, revolution????

  61. knarlyknight Says:

    Enk said “soooo 2003”, I was nitpicking.

    Fox reporting on Beck – another example of attempting to make news out of lunatics that they are responsible for putting on a pulpit. Transparently self-serving crap. Glad you at least recognized it as crap this time.

  62. knarlyknight Says:

    However, if it were AGW related, you wouldn’t have the expertise to recognize it as crap.

  63. shcb Says:

    lol, yeah, you need a PHD to see if a graph is going up or down.

  64. shcb Says:

    He’s no more loony than Rachel, I had to smile a couple times in the Stewart interview, I could see the flip side of what you guys see when you watch Beck or Rush, Jon pointed it in most cases, he is pretty sharp.

  65. knarlyknight Says:

    Yes, shcb, a little more education might help because apparently you think this graph does not go up at an alarming rate…

  66. shcb Says:

    I was talking about the last decade or so :)

  67. knarlyknight Says:

    okaaay, soooo, you got a sample size of ten years or so… you can’t be suggesting there is much of statistical significance to extrapolate from that. And if not, then your “PHD” comment makes no sense.

    All that aside, and recognizing it’s nothing more than another data point on a graph, would you agree that 2010 is going to be the hottest average global temperature on record?

  68. shcb Says:

    You are right, it’s just a ten year period. What is important is that the alarmists are giving the impression that temps are still significantly rising in those ten years, and they aren’t, just look at your graph, and that graph has been squished to look worse than it is. Take ’98 out of that 5 year average and see what happens, then go reread JBC’s anomalies post and see why I smile a lot when he posts those things. That explains my PHD comment.

    I kind of doubt this year will be the warmest, ’98 is pretty hard to beat. I’m not sure what they are doing with that “land-ocean” thing, maybe the text of where you found this says. I try and limit my graphs to only atmosphere since that is what the CO2 is affecting. It looks like we are in another El Nino year so it may get warmer than the last few years, but ’98 was a very strong one. It’s hard to say, it looks like La Nina is already starting in the south so this may be a short El Nino event, and the atmosphere always lags a little. It’s hard to predict events, especially when those events are in the future.

  69. knarlyknight Says:

    Okay, but CO2 concentrations don’t just affect the atmosphere. See coral reefs – health of, etc.

    Alternately, Put some Ice in a blender. Add some warm Water, inject Co2 if you wish. Measure air temp in blender, and water temp in blender, Record. Then press mix button for 10 seconds and repeat measurements & record. Then press liquify for 10 seconds, repeat measurements & record. Then press liquify for 1 minute, repeat measurements & record. Get it? I’d say the best Hypothesis is that Air temperature has less influence on overall average temperature of the system than does the water temperatures and quanitity of ice, due to differing MASS. For the true temperature of the whole system, you can either liquify it fully (not recommended for the planet) or average all measurements together weighted by (taking into account) the mass of each item measured. I hope that’s how the scientists construct their average. If it is a simple average I’ll be discouraged by their inadequacy.

  70. enkidu Says:

    ’98 is pretty hard to beat

    Forgive me if I just point out the plain facts (using, you know, math) but ’98 is beaten by 2005, 2007 and 2009. It seems to be almost matched by 2002 (also 2003? can’t see it behind the green line) and nearly so by 2006. A quick glance shows that every single year of this decade is at the highest temp range with *only* 1998 being as anomalously warm. We’ll know the 2010 data soon and it doesn’t look good for the hurf durf morans. So if we look at it carefully, the temp spike of ’98 is approximately matched by 3 yrs, is exceeded by 3 yrs and is lower for three years. All nine data points after are above the previous decade (excepting ’98;).

    Stretching the graph out isn’t going to change the overall direction: UP.

    I keep forgetting: in the Wingnutoverse up is down, black is white, Obama is a sociamalist, Reagan didn’t triple the national debt and dumbya didn’t double it. Seriously is there *anything* you have been right about (as in correct) like, ever?

    The added CO2 is changing the pH of our oceans. Measurably. Using science. Look it up (note, do not use wwnj ‘info’ sources like fox, newsmax, drudge, hate radio or similar bullshit).

    This is like playing chess with someone who is playing checkers – they win every time! at checkers
    hurf durf

  71. Smith Says:

    You damn liberals and your “science” and “facts” and other things on don’t understand. All that junk is worthless. The only people who care about that are Islamofascisocialists and those dirty muds. Us Conservatives have no need for all that. Watch, as I destroy all your well thought out arguments and fancy pants graphs with the ultimate right-wing weapon, loudly yelling catch phrases until everyone gives up and I convince myself I have won.

    hockey stick, Hockey Stick, HOCKEY STICK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  72. shcb Says:

    You are getting close Knarly, yes the density of water is much greater than air 800 to 1000 times greater depending on things like altitude, and such. The ocean has much more capacity to absorb heat than the atmosphere, it also has more effect on the atmosphere than the atmosphere has on the seas. You are getting close, at least you are thinking about it, better than Smith and Enky.

    Enky, the atmosphere was considerably warmer in 1998 than the years you cite according to UAH data, they all hovered around 0.3c with 1998 at 0.52c.

    Knarly, you asked if I thought this would be the warmest year? I plugged the first 11 months into a spreadsheet, It looks like it will be close to 1998. If December is somewhere normal this year will be at about 0.5c, it almost certainly will be warmer than the years Enky cited.

  73. enkidu Says:

    It didn’t take Mr Smith very long to figure out there is no rational ‘discussion’ with wrong wing nutjob.

    My observations on knarly’s graph still stand, cite whatever numbers you like (without links, of course (eye roll)), but the facts are this decade was the hottest on record (you’ll blather on about sunspots, dowsing, moon moths and tides – lol tides…)

    taxamagical wwnj ‘thinking’ can’t be reasoned with. The Wingnutoverse doesn’t use laws of ‘nature’ like math, physics or ‘reason’. It is just whatever faux outrage rush and the hate radio dipsh!ts vomit forth du jour.

  74. shcb Says:

    no doubt this is the hotest decade on record (but not ever) (1998 isn’t in this decade) the temp rise has also flatened out, those two points can coexist.

    I have provided links to the UAH data (wasn’t hard to find), I have provided you with my graphs, or you can believe what the priests tell you, you’re going to have to count out the high priest AlGore though, he is falling out of faith with the church.

  75. enkidu Says:

    You really can’t read, can you. Not a question. I most definitely did not say hottest decade ever. Now your blather is all about dirty fuckin hippys belief in ‘priests’?

    Please, turn off your computer, unplug it from Algore’s Information Superhighway and go back to writing angry letters to your local right wing newsrag.

    Gosh and golly thanks for pointing out 1998 is not in this decade, brilliance!

  76. shcb Says:

    I was pointing out the selective wording. Saying it is the hotest day of the year in March is pointless, saying it in August has some merrit. AWG folks use the “on record” to ignore the MWP since the “record” starts about the peak (low point) of the little ice age.

    When you won’t check the validity of your side of the argument you are taking it on faith as much as any born again Christian.

  77. enkidu Says:

    Based on knarly’s graph (which is the only graph I’m referring to), the last ten years are considerably warmer than the previous ten. But just keep trying to convince rational folks that it is all tides and sunspots.

    I don’t need faith to look at a graph and determine that you are full of shit.
    hurf durf taxamagical sociamalism!

  78. knarlyknight Says:


    “My” graph (from NASA) was based on actual temperatures taken on land and of the sea surface, based on a huge number of sensing stations but it does not cover the whole planet (e.g major parts of antarctica excluded.)

    “shcb’s” figures (from UAH) based on thermal imaging by satelites of the atmosphere which are computed somehow into calculated temperatures for the whole globe.

    Neither are perfect, and they give different results because they are measuring different things.

    In a general discussion like this it is strange to switch from one basis (NASA) to another (UAH) as the results are pretty much the same. Can’t see why shcb did that, unless to maybe to obfuscate. The main differences between NASA and UAH being that 1998 isn’t so profound in the UAH data and that the UHH trend line does not rise quiet as fast as the NASA trend – but both show a trend towards us being boiled frogs.

  79. shcb Says:

    God this is frustating, the last decade was warmer, the last decade was warmer, the last decade was warmer. Is that enough? the last decade also was flat, or nearly so, it was just flat at a higher level. Now what happens when something that goes up and down flatens out? it usually goes down. We’ll see.

    Actually Knarly, the UAH data was more pronounced for 1998 if you look at it on a monthly basis. Since the El Nino events are typically over the winter months the event splits a year so to see the spike you have to look at it by the month.

    I use the UAH data mainly because it is readily available. The NASA data is also under more of a political cloud given the relationship with the director and AlGore. It also was manipulated to more closely match Mann’s.

  80. enkidu Says:

    I haven’t seen this UAH data, I am simply taking a look at the graph that knarly linked to. I’ve seen this same graph elsewhere, several times. Now, again, I am sorry to have to use math, science and you know, reason, but if you look at the red line (5-year running mean), what is the overall vector of the line? Up. Not flat, not down, not taxamagial hurf durf nonsense.

    You can blame it on tides, sunspots, aliens or Tom Cruise, I honestly don’t care, because it simply isn’t germane to discussing that one graph. If you want to drag in something else, try linking to it rather than just spouting right wing bullshit about Algore being the root of all evil or whatever.

    We are running an almost completely unprecedented experiment in global atmospheric composition. On the one side we have the world’s scientific community, reasonable people and responsible people. On the other we have oil companies, coal companies, political extremists, hucksters and a decidedly small and shrinking number of scientists and charlatans who deny human activities have anything to do with the health of our biosphere.

    The solution is just like the CFC and SO2 problems that came before: change.
    Or just keep spouting the same old wwnj bullshit. I think we all know it will be the latter choice for you ol wwnj. It’s all a big lib plot using ‘science’ ‘math’ ‘reason’ and other libtard sh!t! Think with yer gut! Git angry at the mudhut usurper and his Evil cap n trade! garrrrrr!

  81. shcb Says:

    ok, let’s look at this graph, look at 1960 timeframe, it was flat for a while then went down. now look at current time fram, it is flat, even the 5 year average is flatening out, of course it isn’t flat yet because it lags. This 30 year cyle has been repeating for as long as we can determine, then these 30 year periods are themselves a cycle. We may be getting to the top of that cycle or we may have a few more of these 30 year cycles before we reach the top.

    You guys keep saying I am ignoring the science and yet I seem to be the only one that has crunched the numbers myself. At least Knarly knows who UAH and NASA are, what the differences of technology used are, and their limitations.

    The cause is the entire point of this debate. With the exception of Mann, all the graphs are fairly similar, the policy question is how big is the problem and what do we do about it, if there is anything we can.

  82. enkidu Says:

    Anyone who can look at the graph knarls linked to and declare that the 5yr running mean is flattening out needs new glasses or a brain transplant.

    Yes yes you ‘crunched’ (a word which here most probably means ‘distorted’) the UAH numbers. And you *also* know what NASA is? Golly thanks mr wise and blabbering wrong wing nut job fool, us dumb libs would never have been enlightened if it weren’t for your bigoted bellowing.

    Now can you please stop using Algore’s amazing Information Superhighway? Just unplug your fancy digital typewriter thingee and go back to mailing your reichwing screeds to your local paper (they do love your crayon drawings of murder and mayhem along with your quixotic ‘spelling’ and ‘grammar’)

  83. knarlyknight Says:

    FYI I pulled the data and ran the numbers into charts & trend linmes too, it’s just not very exciting to replicate other people’s graphs especially when those other people have about zillion more years of theory and applied statistics behicnd them already. Now, if their graphs actually were wrong then that’d be another story…

    Also, since you admit 2010 is going to be as hot or hotter than any year on record, you also have to admit that the 5 year trend line will be going up when that gets added and the lower temperature earliest year falls out of the 5yr average.

    As for the supposed flattening before reversing direction, well sometimes it does but almost as often there is no flattening it just changes direction or it flattens then keeps going up (e.g. early thirties, eraly 80’s early 90’s). I wouldn’t put much faith if any faith in your “it flattens before a reversal” hypothesis.

    Now that we’ve established it keeps getting hotter and all evidence points to AGW, your policy question about how big is the problem can also be answered by the scientists, or even the Pentagon whose report indicates ecological devastation from AGW is the #1 threat to America over the next several decades. That makes coal industry execs. terrorists.

  84. shcb Says:

    I agree, this year will tilt the line from a little down to a little up, looks like we have similar graphs. but generally the line is pretty flat. The La Nina will likely bring it back down too.

    I do respecfully reject the notion that all evidence points to AGW, Awg has some effect but it is probably very small, maybe not, but probably.

    when I say it will go down I am refering to the big wave, not the small 30 year fluctuations, if it is natural it will eventually go on a downward trend with the periodic flattening periods followed by downturns instead of the upturns we see now. We may go through a few more of these upturns, we would have to see a few more to get to the MWP temps.

  85. knarlyknight Says:


    This interesting, didn’t realize mummification was possible for 8 million years…

  86. shcb Says:

    Had to put this in ther to keep that grant money coming :)

    And while there is some concern that the carbon released from the newly rotting forest may contribute to global warming, a release from the university team member David Elliot, professor emeritus of earth sciences at Ohio State, said the carbon released is “trivial compared to what you produce when you drive your car.”

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.