Global Warming...New Report...and it ain't happy news

@Ionus,

LOL..

Oh.. since you would like me to be wrong, could you point out my errors? Since you have pointed out NONE. I can only assume you can't point out any.

Quote:

Of pointing out possible errors and how they have been overcome ? Of determing through experiment how best to approximate values in the future modelling ?

Since I have outlined no experiment or even one that requires an experiment why would I need to model anything yet?

Quote:

What method was used to determine a sample size that would be significant ?

A sample of what?

Quote:

Meanwhile you think you are being clever by explaining what is a real number ?

Since you seem determined to pretend you don't understand simple algebra, I thought I had to explain it to you.

At this point, I have to make sure you understand the simplest of algebra since we can't have conversation if you don't know that. You have argued that I can't calculate a difference between 2 numbers by subtracting one from the other.

1 Reply

@Ionus,

Quote:

Have you even heard of listing assumptions ? Of pointing out possible errors and how they have been overcome ? Of determing through experiment how best to approximate values in the future modelling ? What method was used to determine a sample size that would be significant ? Meanwhile you think you are being clever by explaining what is a real number ?
Who told you that you understand all this, because I think they were being heavily saecastic.

But since you want to require sample size, error and modeling.

You have claimed "An increase in a high and a low does not indicate a rise in temp."

Perhaps you can provide us with your list of assumptions, the possible errors and how they are overcome, what experiment and modeling you used along with the sample size. It is YOUR claim. Where is your data? Where are your statistical numbers to show it can't be true.

1 Reply

@parados,

You fail to understand most things, except possibly what a real number is, so I will explain yet again. It is your job to prove Global Warming. Unless man has been guilty of it since the first amoeba, you have to prove it exists and when it started.

As you have no scientific training, I listed the general headings that have to be addressed. Instead you feel you are successful by trying to prove that faulty data can give a correct result without any experimentation to determine a margin of error. Pathetic science, even for a lawyer.

2 Replies

@Ionus,

Quote:

Unless man has been guilty of it since the first amoeba, you have to prove it exists and when it started.

Another logical fallacy from you.

Because there is one cause for global warming in no way prevents there from being other causes.

1 Reply

@Ionus,

And still no science from you Ionus. You haven't shown where my math was incorrect. You haven't shown where the global warming consensus is incorrect. You only nibble at the edges, calling them names.

1 Reply

@parados,

Quote:

Another logical fallacy from you.

Rather glib statement dont you think ?

Quote:

Because there is one cause for global warming in no way prevents there from being other causes.

And what exactly are you vaguely hinting at ?

0 Replies

@parados,

Quote:

LOL..

Doom and gloom, people, but parody laughs at the idea of Global Warming and proving it. Obviously he expects us to take his word for it.

Quote:

could you point out my errors? Since you have pointed out NONE.

Are you hoping someone will stumble into this thread and read just that one post ? Because you are either damaged goods or are lying. Which is it ?

Quote:

A sample of what?

Yes, you have impressed everyone with your ability to plead dumb and innocent. Wots a moider, officer ??

Quote:

Since you seem determined to pretend you don't understand simple algebra, I thought I had to explain it to you.

You were being your usual arrogant insulting self whilst hoping everyone is too stupid to realise.

Quote:

You have argued that I can't calculate a difference between 2 numbers by subtracting one from the other.

More pretense ? Do you think people are saying, WOW! parody is really clever !!!

0 Replies

@parados,

You still dont get it. There is no science consensus. There are some bully boys and a lot of money to be made. If we had a democratic secret ballot then we would have concensus. But your understanding of politics is even less than your lawyers knowledge of science. You have to prove Global Warming, not demand everyone who disagrees must shut up. As usual with any liberal, green or leftist cause there is no debate.Hysteria rules ! Science drools.

1 Reply

@Ionus,

Examining the scientific consensus on global warming

Quote:

It seems that the debate on the
authenticity of global warming and the
role played by human activity is largely
nonexistent among those who understand
the nuances and scientific basis
of long-term
climate processes. The
challenge, rather, appears to be how
to effectively communicate this fact to
policy makers and to a public that continues
to mistakenly perceive debate
among scientists.

The Sceintific consensus on Climate Change

Quote:

The 928 papers were divided into six categories: .... Remarkably, none of the papers disagreed with the consensus position.

Quote:

This analysis shows that scientists publishing in the peer-reviewed literature agree with IPCC, the National Academy of Sciences, and the public statements of their professional societies. Politicians, economists, journalists, and others may have the impression of confusion, disagreement, or discord among climate scientists, but that impression is incorrect.

Consensus vs Certainty

Quote:

But this does not mean that scientists cannot ever know anything with a high degree of confidence or that they are completely divided over global warming.

Consesus in the IPCC

Quote:

It is well understood that science is not something to be decided by voting, but by logical reasoning. The core, then, of scientific consensus among IPCC scientists is that they agree that the report is of the highest scientific integrity and reflects the state of knowledge fairly and adequately.

Perhaps you could present us with your study, scientific or otherwise, that shows there is no consensus. I am curious what percentage you will come up with that don't agree with the prevailing thought. I'm sorry to say this Ionus but there isn't much evidence to support your statement, "There is no science consensus".

1 Reply

@parados,

Quote:

a public that continues to mistakenly perceive debate among scientists.

Mistakenly ? You dont read what ican and okie post, do you ?

Quote:

others may have the impression of confusion, disagreement, or discord among climate scientists, but that impression is incorrect.

Are you saying every climatologist who's career will benefit from Global Warming is in agreeance ? What about geologists ? They were the only ones who understood paleo-climates until Global Warming presented so many career opportunities to climatologists. How many Geologists belive the earth will never warm due to natural causes ?

Quote:

highest scientific integrity

Do you know about the email affair ? About how scientists have been bullied, denied publishing, how some have been spoken to, vilified, accused of working for big business..the list goes on.
How institutions have refused to give it to independant scientists to check ?How the raw data has been shredded so no-one else can check it ?
Your conclusions make as much sense as asking a banana republic dictator if the other politicians support him.
Why dont you come clean and admit that Global Warming is a farce with seperate motives to those of saving the climate ?

1 Reply

@Ionus,

So.. you claim there is no consensus.

I post links to published articles and studies showing there is.

Rather than providing any evidence to back up your original statement you go off on a tangent. Thanks for playing, you are really good at science. Have a nice day Ionus.

1 Reply

@parados,

Do you know what a tangent is ? I know you were very show-offy about learning what real numbers are...I know this is hard for you to understand...but if someone raises questions about the gathering, compilation, and availablity of data, it makes no sense to say it has already been decided. If someone raises questions about the interpretation of that data and how the concenses process has been corrupted, it makes no sense to say concensus has been achieved.
You sound like a dictator who rigged an election and there are many who are unhappy about it but your defence is to say "we had an election, how could there be anything wrong with it ? "

1 Reply

@Ionus,

Right.. and if someone raises the question that the earth might really be flat, we should assume there is no consensus.

If someone raises a question about the way gravity works we should assume there is no scientific consensus.

Your logic is rather faulty there Ionus. Raising questions doesn't prevent there from being a consensus.

But let's look at YOUR statement.

Ionus wrote:

You still dont get it. There is no science consensus. There are some bully boys and a lot of money to be made.

Your statement looks pretty definative. There is no room for equivication. You claim there is "no science consensus."
I raised a question about your lack of data and actually presented data disputing your statement. You can retract your statement if you wish or you can spin on your own petard.

2 Replies

@parados,

Quote:

Right.. and if someone raises the question that the earth might really be flat, we should assume there is no consensus.

Wrong again. If the earth has been proven to be round, and you want to change opinion that the earth is flat, the onus is on you. If there are breaches in the procedures for scientific proof, then the earth remains round. Global Warming has to be proven and the tatcics used amount to dictatorial obbession.

Quote:

If someone raises a question about the way gravity works we should assume there is no scientific consensus.

To compare gravity, something that is demonstrable and obvious, to Global Warming, something that can not be demonstrated, is a huge stretch even by your low standards of anology.

0 Replies

Someone who believes there exists a scientific consensus that human caused CO2 emissions caused global warming, ought to first define what they mean by a scientific consensus.

Here's a dictionary definition of the word consensus:

Quote:

http://unabridged.merriam-webster.com/cgi-bin/unabridged?va=consensus&x=22&y=8
Main Entry: con·sen·sus Pronunciation Guide
Pronunciation: knsen(t)ss
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): -es
Etymology: Latin, from consensus, past participle of consentire to feel together, agree -- more at CONSENT
1 a : harmony, cooperation, or sympathy especially in different parts of an organism b : group solidarity in sentiment and belief <a kind of unspoken consensus ... appeared -- Henry Dicks> <broad group consensus, as manifested in the folkways, mores, and other institutional usages -- H.A.Bloch>
2 a : general agreement : UNANIMITY, ACCORD <the consensus of their opinion, based on reports that had drifted back from the border -- John Hersey> b : collective opinion : the judgment arrived at by most of those concerned <in the consensus of a number of critics -- Current Biography>
3 : a formal statement of religious belief : CONFESSION

Also here are definitions of the words scientific and science:

Quote:

http://unabridged.merriam-webster.com/cgi-bin/unabridged?va=scientific&x=22&y=6
Main Entry: 1sci·en·tif·ic Pronunciation Guide
Pronunciation: |sn.|tifik, -fk, in rapid speech often ()sn.-
Function: adjective
Etymology: Medieval Latin scientificus, from Latin scient-, sciens (present participle of scire to know) + -i- + -ficus -fic -- more at SCIENCE
1 obsolete : yielding knowledge deductively
2 : concerned with or treating of science : devoted to the study or practice of science <a scientific treatise> <scientific training> <scientific in his interests>
3 : of, relating to, or used in science or a branch of science <scientific apparatus> <a scientific formula>
4 : agreeing with or conducted or prepared strictly according to the principles and practice of or for the furtherance of exact science : skilled in the methods of exact science : characteristic or typical of a true scientist especially in perfect disinterestedness and absolute accuracy <scientific research> <a scientific experiment> <the scientific spirit>
5 : conducted or systematized after the manner of science or according to results of investigation by science : practicing thoroughness or systematic methods approximating those of scientists or devised by scientists : applying expert knowledge or technical skill (as in sports, warfare, management) <scientific advertising> <scientific baby care> <a scientific boxer>

Quote:

http://unabridged.merriam-webster.com/cgi-bin/unabridged?va=science&x=26&y=4
Main Entry: sci·ence Pronunciation Guide
Pronunciation: sn(t)s, in rapid speech often -n-
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): -s
Etymology: Middle English, from Middle French, from Latin scientia knowledge, science, from scient-, sciens (present participle of scire to know) + -ia -y; akin to Latin scindere to cut, split -- more at SHED
1 a : possession of knowledge as distinguished from ignorance or misunderstanding : knowledge as a personal attribute <I speak from science and the voice is fate -- Alexander Pope> b : knowledge possessed or attained through study or practice <science crown my age -- Thomas Gray>
2 a : a branch or department of systematized knowledge that is or can be made a specific object of study <the basic tool sciences of reading, writing, and ciphering> <learned in the science of theology> b : something (as a sport or technique) that may be studied or learned like systematized knowledge <skilled in the science of evading work> <little interested in cards and such like science>: as (1) obsolete : a trained skill (as in an occupation) (2) : FENCING (3) : BOXING c : studies mainly in the works of ancient and modern philosophers formerly taught as a group or field of specialization (as at Oxford University) d : any of the individual subjects taught at an educational institution in one of the departments of natural science <required to take two sciences to complete a minor> <students majoring in a science> -- compare HUMANITY 3c
3 a : accumulated and accepted knowledge that has been systematized and formulated with reference to the discovery of general truths or the operation of general laws : knowledge classified and made available in work, life, or the search for truth : comprehensive, profound, or philosophical knowledge; especially : knowledge obtained and tested through use of the scientific method b : such knowledge concerned with the physical world and its phenomena : NATURAL SCIENCE
4 : a branch of study that is concerned with observation and classification of facts and especially with the establishment or strictly with the quantitative formulation of verifiable general laws chiefly by induction and hypotheses <mathematical science>
5 : a system based or purporting to be based upon scientific principles : a method (as of arrangement, functioning) reconciling practical or utilitarian ends with scientific laws <husbandry is a science> <a student of culinary science>
6 usually capitalized : CHRISTIAN SCIENCE
synonym see KNOWLEDGE

0 Replies

@parados,

Quote:

Your logic is rather faulty there Ionus. Raising questions doesn't prevent there from being a consensus.

Your logic is non-existent. The questions raised are about how your concensus can even be claimed to exist. You are saying it must exist, therefore it does, therefore you cant argue it doesnt.

Quote:

You claim there is "no science consensus."

I repeat...if we had a secret ballot by ALL relevant sciences, I would accept that as a concensus. To get the majority of climatologists and say that is the end of the matter is tantamount to a banana republic led by bully boys and self interest.

Quote:

You can retract your statement if you wish or you can spin on your own petard.

Have you given up on maths and moved onto english ? How does one spin on one's own petard ? When you say spin do you mean hoisted ? Because that begs the question when you say hoisted what do you mean ? The original in Shakespeare is "hoist with his own petar", but you are having enough difficulty, arent you ?

1 Reply

@Ionus,

Since you have already hoisted yourself, the only thing left for you to do is spin.

The wind seems to only blow north-north-west for you and never southerly.

Quote:

I repeat...if we had a secret ballot by ALL relevant sciences, I would accept that as a concensus.

So, you would argue there is no consensus on gravity or the earth being round. OK.. We get that. The wind certainly doesn't blow southerly for you.

1 Reply

George Washington at Valley Forge could identify with what is happening this winter. Has the weather changed all that much? Doubtful, folks!!!
http://americanrevwar.homestead.com/files/valley.htm

http://americanrevwar.homestead.com/files/valley3.jpg

http://sirocco.accuweather.com/nx_mosaic_400x300_public/SIR/inmSIRUS_.gif

http://www.onthesnow.com/ots/community/img_news/11397_1_lg.jpg

1 Reply

@okie,

Need you be reminded, weather is not climate, Okie. btw I grew up and lived on the outskirts of Valley Forge.

1 Reply

@kuvasz,

weather + weather + weather + weather + more weather = climate.

And I realize one weather event does not necessarily prove something in total, but if we have heat waves during the summer, the global warmers and cooperative media are always on the spot to point out the link between those weather events and supposed global warming, so this is my way of poking them back. And to be honest, these events occurring so often do not gender more confidence in the temperature data we are getting, especially in the face of mounting evidence of poor siting standards for weather stations around the globe, and forms of data coverups and fudging.

1 Reply

Global Warming...New Report...and it ain't happy news

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know