0
   

5 Failed Greentard Predictions

 
 
Reply Wed 28 Jan, 2015 02:03 am
http://dailycaller.com/2014/03/04/top-5-failed-snow-free-and-ice-free-predictions/
 
Ionus
 
  2  
Reply Fri 24 Apr, 2015 06:36 am
From the Title Post Ref :

Quote:

1.) Scientists predicted in 2000 that kids would grow up without snow. It was 14 years ago now when UK climate scientists argued that global warming would make snowfall a “a very rare and exciting event”.

“Children just aren’t going to know what snow is,” Dr. David Viner, a scientist with the climatic research unit at the University of East Anglia, told the UK Independent in 2000.

After the wettest winter in 248 years, the UK was hit with snowstorms last week. Last year, the UK’s climate authority predicted that this winter would be drier than usual, with only a 15 percent chance of being wet. They were very wrong.
Do they have any explanation for the Little Ice Age ? When people skated on the Thames and Charles Dickens wrote his novels ? What caused that and why cant it happen again ?
parados
 
  2  
Reply Fri 24 Apr, 2015 08:15 am
@gungasnake,
I think that should be called 5 things gunga will believe in spite of facts to the contrary.
Ionus
 
  2  
Reply Fri 24 Apr, 2015 09:03 am
@parados,
Well lets see those facts to the contrary of the first part which I posted .
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  2  
Reply Fri 24 Apr, 2015 09:46 am
@Ionus,
Rare events don't mean they never happen. This is cherry picking. It picks the word of one scientist and extrapolates it to the plural and it tries to make it mean never. It then takes one winter and attempts to use it as the mean of all winters.
Ionus
 
  2  
Reply Fri 24 Apr, 2015 08:55 pm
@parados,
It could also be cherry picking of events over the last 10,000 years that lead some to believe in Global Warming . Perhaps if I ask again you might respond...

Do they have any explanation for the Little Ice Age ? When people skated on the Thames and Charles Dickens wrote his novels ? What caused that and why cant it happen again ?
parados
 
  2  
Reply Sat 25 Apr, 2015 11:33 am
@Ionus,
Cherry picking over 10,000 years? That is a little hard to do when you look at 10,000 years and consider climate to be a 30 year period. It would be impossible to cherry pick doing that because your pool of data is so large.

Cherry picking is picking a single anomalous year as your starting point for a 20 year period when you have data for 40 years or more.
Ionus
 
  2  
Reply Sat 25 Apr, 2015 08:21 pm
@parados,
Quote:
That is a little hard to do when you look at 10,000 years and consider climate to be a 30 year period.
Unbelievable . Until you Global Warming Thuggees acme along, climate was 100,000 year periods . Gloom and doom and the greenie agenda doesnt sit happy with facts, does it ? Not even weather is measured in 30 year periods . Try 100 year cycles MINIMUM !

Quote:
when you have data for 40 years or more
I didnt know that...so in 1970 they were accurately collecting data to prove Global Warming ? How were they doing that with all the collectors gathered around human hot spots like cities and airports ? With collectors sitting on roof tops in car parks or next to air conditioning vents ?
Ionus
 
  2  
Reply Sat 25 Apr, 2015 08:23 pm
None of the Global Warming Thuggees have responded to the questions I have asked twice now . http://able2know.org/topic/266052-1#post-5939923
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  2  
Reply Sun 26 Apr, 2015 09:43 am
@Ionus,
So what is the weather like where you are today since you think weather is 100 year phenomenon?
parados
 
  3  
Reply Sun 26 Apr, 2015 09:55 am
@Ionus,
Quote:
I didnt know that...so in 1970 they were accurately collecting data to prove Global Warming ? How were they doing that with all the collectors gathered around human hot spots like cities and airports ? With collectors sitting on roof tops in car parks or next to air conditioning vents ?

This is the kind of cherry picking I see you have to resort to. You pick a very few sites that you can't even tell us for sure if they are in the data and pretend they throw all other data that has nothing to do with them out the window.

Things not affected by human hot spots.
Balloon readings
satellite readings
ocean readings
Time of ice out on lakes
Dates when birds migrate north and south
location of species
etc, etc.


Not only that you fail to understand that a site that is wrongly placed will still show a trend even if it is not accurate. Once something is placed in an area where it has artificially warmer readings then it will stabilize to those readings and show a trend from the new baseline. For your idiotic cherry picking, we have to assume that the majority of trend errors are only in one direction. Something that would be statistically unlikely. But you fail to allow for the fact that the data is checked with other nearby collection sites and adjustments made for those higher readings.

Rather than deal with ALL of those things you cherry pick less than 10% of the data collection sites that have been pulled out of data in more than one study and there is still warming. The last such study actually showed if you discounted those sites, the warming trend was actually stronger.
Ionus
 
  2  
Reply Sun 26 Apr, 2015 09:27 pm
@parados,
Quote:
So what is the weather like where you are today since you think weather is 100 year phenomenon?
No signs of Global Warming, thanks for asking .
0 Replies
 
Ionus
 
  2  
Reply Sun 26 Apr, 2015 09:43 pm
@parados,
Quote:
you fail to understand that a site that is wrongly placed will still show a trend even if it is not accurate
Unbelievable . So if it gets colder they turn the airconditioners on more which blows more hot air on the measuring instruments which records a hotter temperature . If it is in a car park, how much heat is reflected for what degree of bitumen temperature ? No idea ? You can not get anything from bad data, not even a trend . Your lack of science tells me you never went to Big Pre-School, you know, University .

Balloon readings - these are used to measure winds primarily, temperature is recorded wherever the wind goes, not where you want to measure temp .

Quote:
satellite readings
When did these start in any significant numbers ? Was it the 1970's when Global Warming Thuggees first appeared ?

Quote:
ocean readings
This will be good . When did these start and who compiled the data ?

Quote:
Time of ice out on lakes
What is that ? Shorthand in the hope no one calls you on it ?

Quote:
Dates when birds migrate north and south
What efforts were made to eliminate any other reason ? How was it proved Global Warming was the cause and only cause ?

Quote:
location of species
??? Ahhh....I see....science....wowwww !!

Quote:
etc, etc.
Oh no please, dont be modest ! Share !

Quote:
Something that would be statistically unlikely
There's an 80% chance you are educated beyond your intelligence . You know what that means ? The other 20% is impossible ! Totally statistically unlikely !

Quote:
Rather than deal with ALL of those things you cherry pick less than 10% of the data collection sites that have been pulled out of data in more than one study and there is still warming. The last such study actually showed if you discounted those sites, the warming trend was actually stronger.
Didnt you say the trend going in a biased direction was statistically unlikely ? It sounded like you, full of 'science', bad data and shaky conclusions .
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
  1. Forums
  2. » 5 Failed Greentard Predictions
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 04/12/2021 at 05:25:28