@mhaze: "And the data shows that earlier predictions on a global scale were somewhat (!) overstated or over-pessimistic."

1) What Data shows?
2) What earlier predictions, be specific?
3) How so were they over-stated or over-pessimistic and show the current Data you rely upon to 'prove' your claims?

Published Climate science papers IPCC reports (backed by papers) only! Not Al Gore's movie, newspaper or some shill on a blog site etc.

You made the claim, let's see you back it up with scientific evidence.

Max pulled your pants down. Enough of the rewriting history after the event. Only Sophists and Manipulators do that. An honest open genuine person interested in the truth no matter what it is would have provided the direct ref to back up your claim that: "If you look at my original post on this I was talking about the global matters which you've now acknowledged were correct."

That's also called a cherry-picking distraction and should not isolate everything you asserted in this long discussion with Max as being null and void. The record is there, be careful your memory is better than your knowledge of the scientific facts as they stand.

Post a verbatim quote of what you're alluding to above as "original post" with a url link or a page number.

I'm very good at this. Outing people who play word games and duck and weave over the facts and the truth of what they said or didn't say.

Your opinions about me are beside the point and do not count. Denying you've been nailed already won't change the facts either.

@LeoLane, you are a foul mouthed gutless coward hiding behind your computer screen on social media. You're a serial abuser, a little bully and an offensive nasty deranged cyber-stalker. You were like that long before I turned up on OLO.

Do something about your depression and rage inside of you. Perhaps seek some help from a psychology professional, ask your doctor, or your preferred spiritual adviser/counselor.

Or don't. I don't care because you are not my responsibility, nor am I to blame.

More nonsense from bigmouth:” hiding behind your computer screen”.
This is an online forum . If you wanted a punch in your big empty head, you should have chosen an appropriate venue, and I am sure there would be plenty of takers once you opened your big lying mouth.
You referred to me as foul-mouthed. Show me where I have used foul language, bigmouth, or are you being untruthful again, as is your habit?.
You have some excellent advice for yourself, bigmouth.” Do something about your depression and rage inside of you. Perhaps seek some help from a psychology professional, ask your doctor, or your preferred spiritual adviser/counselor. “ You are obviously addressing yourself, so drop the pretence that it applies to anyone else.
Refer us to science which shows any measurable human effect on climate, bigmout, or stop supporting climate fraud which asserts a human caused effect on climate.

Explaining ocean warming (science)
Complete Title: Explaining ocean warming : causes, scale, effects and consequences
Edited by D. Laffoley and J. M. Baxter September 2016
https://portals.iucn.org/library/node/46254

Has 97 results for the word "algae" :-)

Climate Denier Crackpot Index
“A simple method for rating potentially revolutionary contributions to climate science:”
https://greenfyre.wordpress.com/2008/10/16/climate-denier-crackpot-index/

1. A -5 point starting credit.

2. 1 point for every statement that is widely agreed on (cf peer reviewed science) to be false.

3. 2 points for every statement that is clearly vacuous.

4. 3 points for every statement that is logically inconsistent.

5. 5 points for each such statement that is adhered to despite careful correction (cf peer reviewed science).

6. 5 points for using a thought experiment that contradicts the results of a widely accepted real experiment.

7. 5 points for each word in all capital letters (except for those with defective keyboards).

8. 5 points for each mention of “Al Gore“, “the Hockey Stick” or “Global Government“.

9. 10 points for each claim that climate modeling science is fundamentally misguided (without good evidence).

10. 10 points for pointing out that you have gone to school, as if this were evidence of sanity.

and 25 more.

mhaze, PART 2...

>>The one thing I'd mention is that my point wasn't about global models but about global data.<<
The data points involve global weather on specific days in specific locations. This is not climate, get it? To understand the climate shifts involves interpretative methodologies. The global methodologies were not clear: the regional ones were more specific and clearer.

>>It's all very well to create models to try to predict the future but that does have to verified against actual data.<<
(Slaps hand to forehead!) Where do you think their models are coming from? They're modelling climate from weather data. D'uh! Averaging it globally doesn't work as well for some purposes. Appreciating regional data in its context works better for some purposes. (sighs).

“And the data shows that earlier predictions on a global scale were somewhat (!) overstated or over-pessimistic.”
No, a global reading of the data all averaged out was misleading. Regional models of the data proved far more accurate. Data. Smooth it globally, or understand it regionally?

>>From that I'm wary of, but don't discount, current predictions. In a warming world it'd be surprising if there weren't some region changes.<<
Except that’s not how you started: you started off laughing at ‘rain bombs’ and copied and pasted some denialist cherrypicked propaganda from some denialist blog.

Note again: THE MODELS COME FROM THE DATA! The issue is, which one? Global averages, or regional?

“Climate change, whether driven by natural or human forcing, can lead to changes in the likelihood of the occurrence or strength of extreme weather and climate events or both. Since the AR4, the observational basis has increased substantially, so that some extremes are now examined over most land areas. Furthermore, more models with higher resolution and a greater number of regional models have been used in the simulations and projections of extremes. {1.3.3; Figure 1.9}

@Max Green Note again: THE MODELS COME FROM THE DATA!

But Max, the Data comes from RUTHERGLEN .... omg we're going to die from Bushfires now because BOM effed up all the "Real" Data!
http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=18490&page=5

Max, mate, don't you get it like mhaze/leo et al do get it?

Why don't you just listen to Marohasy the Queen of Handwaving and Occam's Nightmare and then believe her?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0OeUINoYWsg

Send me your email addresses mahaze/leo/jf and buy you all a copy for Xmas
http://www.lulu.com/au/en/shop/s-peter-davis/occams-nightmare-ebook/ebook/product-21017102.html

-

Global Economic Symposium (GES) 2013 - interview with George Lakoff
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EjNwXx2DwcQ

Professor George Lakoff on The Political Mind
http://library.fora.tv/2008/06/20/George_Lakoff_on_The_Political_Mind

Lakoff on Adam Smith, Taxes, Progressive Thought and the Conservative Rewriting of History and Adam Smith's Original Principles
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jCXxc_M9EmE&feature=youtu.be&t=1h6m55s

There is no Political Ideology of the Moderate. I am a Moderate. Moderation in all things including Moderation.

Ideology is a collection of Beliefs held by an individual, group or society.

Religion is a collection of Beliefs too.

Far out, what a weird coincidence! :-)

Exploring the Psychology of Wealth (quick 9 mins video)
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/business-jan-june13-makingsense_06-21/

On Wealth and Wrongdoing: How Social Class Influences Unethical Behavior
http://escholarship.org/uc/item/57x7n454
-

JF Aus,
it's YOUR argument. YOU find the relevant paragraph for us. Don't ask us to 'just believe' because you found an article on ocean warming that contains the word algae in it! (Slaps hand to forehead).

I *bet* it mentions algae as a feedback loop, not primary cause. But I'm not even going to look. That's YOUR job. Because you have failed to do your job, I'm going to list it all again!

The following map shows the VAST majority of the earth's oceans to have less than THREE HUNDREDTHS of a GRAM of algae per CUBIC METRE OF WATER! That's only 0.03 grams / M3!
http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/GlobalMaps/view.php?d1=MYD28M&d2=MY1DMM_CHLORA

What you have to prove:
1. What was the original algae load in the oceans?
2. What is the anthropogenic algae load?
3. How much warming does X% extra of algae contribute to the oceans?
4. How evidence is there that algae can warm the oceans? How many watt's per gram? Where are the studies that show how much warming algae do?
5. How can you demonstrate that algae add an extra 4 HIROSHIMA BOMBS per second? (Same as 3 Christmas light globes per square metre of the earth's surface).
6. Along with hiding their ability to generate VAST amounts of heat, do algae also hide Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy? (Hint: algae simply CANNOT generate that amount of heat: GET A LIFE!)

Here's a thing: Joseph Fourier discovered CO2's heat trapping properties back in the 1820's.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenhouse_effect#History