You have Hansen's prediction right in front of your face. What do you have to say about it? Second of all, you were supposed to cite some academic journals to back up your previous claim. You have nothing to say about either, because you are completely full of shit. You are net negative on society. People like you tend to support Obama. You dope.
That's some impressive dishonesty there. Hansen actually presented three scenarios, A B and C. Of those he stated to congress that B was most likely. Naturally, you've taken "A" and posted it as if it's the only one and entirely deleted any mention that Hansen stated that B was most likely. So when you wrote "You want to see real fraud" you have delivered.
Amazing the measurements had the inexcusable gall to not do anything like he predicted. BTW: Where was he on the little ice age predictions of the 70's. When global cooling didn't quite pan out by the 80's it became obvious that global warming was the problem. Holy crap no wonder you love him he sounds just like a losing trader that can't determine the trend to save his life. That's okay paul Ehrlich had the same problems. I think he's just been proven wrong so many times he's embarrassed to show his face and make yet another losing bet/prediction.
This is coming from the person who reads the following email "I've just completed Mike's Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (ie, from 1981 onwards) and from 1961 for Keith's to hide the decline." and determines that there was no trick or decline to speak of. You are an idiot. Who do you work for and how much do they pay to push the MMGW agenda? It is obvious you are out of bullets.
okay,centaur,why did you omit the other charts he presented?A,B,C...and he himself said scenario B was most likely to unfold?Omission is lying right? Anyway,melting caps and scientific consensus dont mean anything to you because your an illiterate abortion trying to defend ignorant dogma.Ignoring science fact is ignorance.You define it to a 't'.Please go back to your obama is not a citizen garbage.Typical teabagger.
Actually, his B scenario (the one he said was most likely) was around a 10% overestimate, compared to a 50%+ overestimate for scenario A, and a greater than 25% underestimate for scenario C. The overestimate in B compared to the best estimate of the total forcings is more like 5%. Given the uncertainties in the observed forcings, this is about as good as can be reasonably expected. He was studying Venus in the 1970's, and worked on the Pioneer Venus probe. By comparison, what were you doing in the 1970's?
Present the academic papers you are refering to. Until then, you ought to use more of your efforts obtaining your GED. How many more lies are you going to tell? I don't know, but I am going to expose every lie you tell.